BOARD DATE: 13 June 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120020647 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, correction of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show a more favorable separation authority and narrative reason for separation that will afford her veterans' benefits. 2. The applicant states she has been unable to use her GI Bill because of the classification she received at the time of her discharge. She states she was told she would be able to use the GI Bill that she paid into monthly or she would get her money back that she paid in. 3. The applicant provides no additional evidence. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 January 2006 for a period of 4 years. She completed basic training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, and was transferred to Fort Sam Houston, Texas, to undergo advanced individual training. 3. On 22 May 2006 an Entrance Physical Standards Board determined the applicant had a pre-existing medical condition of major depressive disorder with two prior suicide attempts. The board noted that she required psychiatric treatment for greater than 6 months and hospitalization prior to enlistment. Accordingly, she did not meet entrance medical standards and the board recommended her discharge. 4. The applicant concurred with the proceedings and requested to be discharged from the Army without delay. 5. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 5 July 2006 and directed characterization of her service as honorable. 6. Accordingly, she was honorably discharged on 10 July 2006 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 5-11, due to having failed medical/physical procurement standards. She was issued a separation code of "JFW" and a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3." 7. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11, provides the criteria for separation of personnel who did not meet procurement medical fitness standards when accepted for enlistment. It states that medical proceedings must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate military medical authorities within 6 months of initial active duty for training which would have temporarily or permanently disqualified the member for entry into military service had it been detected at the time of enlistment. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no indication of any violations of the applicant's rights. 2. The applicant was issued the proper separation authority and narrative reason for separation commensurate with the basis for her discharge and she has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that and error or injustice exists in her case. 3. In regard to the applicant's issues regarding the use of the GI Bill, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) administers that program under the laws that govern that agency and this Board has no authority or jurisdiction over that agency. 4. Any issues regarding eligibility for benefits should be directed to the VA as the Board does not have the authority to address issues handled by an agency outside of the Department of the Army. 5. Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to grant her request. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __x___ ___x_____ ___x_____ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. ___________x______________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120020647 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120020647 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1