IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 November 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160005313 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x___ ___x____ ___x____ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 November 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160005313 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. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 November 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160005313 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 her character of service as honorable instead of uncharacterized. 2. The applicant states she was recruited at a recruiting office in Decatur, GA, in 1987 and entered the military service under the delayed entry program on 15 July 1987, which is the date she had her physical. During her arrival at Fort Dix, NJ, she was assigned to a company and to a drill instructor. Shortly thereafter, she was admitted to a U.S. Army hospital. She was subsequently discharged her and flown back to Atlanta, GA. She did not receive any documentation from the hospital about why she was being sent home from the hospital. a. She is not applying for disability. However, when she was discharged, her DD Form 214 showed she was released from the Army with an honorable discharge with no disability. She would now like to work with veterans and believes an honorable discharge should be her discharge status. b. She is hoping her medical records show that she can have her characterization of service upgraded. She feels this upgrade would help with her employment status to work with Veterans. c. It took her a long time to apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) because she was unaware that she could ask for an upgrade and she had lost her original DD Form 214. 3. The applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214 and a self-authored letter. 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. On 5 November 1987, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA.) 3. The applicant's records contains a DA Form 4707 (Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) Proceedings), dated 9 December 1987, which shows that after careful consideration of her medical records, laboratory findings, and medical examination, the Board found her medically unfit for enlistment in accordance with current medical fitness standards. This form shows the following entries: a. Chief Complaint: The Applicant was referred from Community Mental Health Activity for admission on 1 December 1987, following reports by the unit for numerous acts of inappropriate behavior during her initial five weeks of basic training and delusions of a conspiracy to persecute her or have her declared crazy. b. History of Present Illness: This 28-year old female presented to the Walson Army Community Hospital with a history of numerous inappropriate behavior during her basic training. She had a previous psychiatric history, approximately 10 years ago, diagnosis uncertain, but she was treated for several years (approximately 8) with Navane, an antipsychotic drug, making the diagnostic probability of schizophrenia obvious. According to unit reports, the applicant had several counseling sessions for disrespect, insubordination, and disobedience. The applicant claims that both her peers and instructors were out to get her and gave several examples of a conspiracy to make her appear crazy. She felt the reason for this conspiracy was her high intelligence and advanced age. There were several ideas of self-reference that windows were left open so she would catch the flu, and she claimed to have overheard a drill instructor stating to her peers "shoot [applicant]" while being instructed on the M-16. c. Physical Examination: Her physical examination was essentially within normal limits. The mental status examination revealed a 28-year old female who was mildly agitated with psychomotor agitation, alert, and oriented. She denied hallucination, but one would question this over the supposed overheard conversation of a drill instructor instructing her peers to shoot her. She did admit to an elaborate delusional system of paranoid persecution by peers and instructors in the unit. Her mood was somewhat depressed and she demonstrated confusion, perplexity, and marked paranoid preoccupation requiring much reassurance that she was not going to be formally charged with any crime or fraudulent enlistment. d. Diagnosis: Schizophrenia, paranoid type, chronic, with acute exacerbation, severe. d. Recommendation: The applicant was unfit for enlistment according to Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), paragraph 2-30, and should be separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-11. 4. The medical approving authority approved the findings of the EPSBD on 12 December 1987 and forwarded the recommended course of action to the unit commander for disposition. 5. On 12 December 1987, the applicant was informed of the medical findings of the EPSBD. She acknowledged she understood that legal advice of an attorney, employed by the Army, was available to her or that she could consult civilian counsel at her own expense. She also acknowledged she understood that she could request discharge or retention on active duty. On the same date, she concurred with the proceedings and requested discharge from the Army. 6. The applicant’s immediate commander recommended her separation from the Army on 12 December 1987. The separation approving authority directed her discharge from the Army on 15 December 1987. 7. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows she was discharged on 18 December 1987, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11, due to not meeting procurement medical fitness standards – no disability. She was issued an "uncharacterized" character of service, with a separation code of "JFT." She completed 1 month and 14 days of net active service and was not awarded an MOS. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, sets policies, standards, and procedures to insure the readiness and competency of the force while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Soldiers for a variety of reasons. a. Paragraph 3-9 provided that a separation would be described as entry level with uncharacterized service if processing were initiated while a Soldier was in an entry-level status, except when: (1) An under other than honorable conditions characterization was authorized when the reason for separation was warranted by the circumstances of the case; or (2) The Secretary of the Army, on a case-by-case basis, determined a characterization of service as honorable was clearly warranted by the presence of unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance of duty. This characterization was authorized when the Soldier was separated by reason of selected changes in service obligation, for convenience of the government, and under Secretarial plenary authority. b. Entry-level status (ELS) is defined as the first 180 days of continuous active service for RA Soldiers. c. Paragraph 5-11 provided that Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards when accepted for enlistment or who became medically disqualified under these standards, prior to entrance on active duty, active duty for training, or initial entry training would be separated. A medical proceeding, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within 6 months of the Soldier's initial entrance on active duty, that the condition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry into military service had it been detected at that time, and the medical condition did not disqualify the Soldier from retention in the service, under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision would normally be honorable, but would be uncharacterized, if the Soldier was in an ELS. 2. Army Regulation 40-501 governs medical fitness standards for enlistment, induction, appointment, retention, and separation. Chapter 2 provides for the physical standards for enlistment/induction. Paragraph 2-27k states current (or history of) anxiety disorders (anxiety or panic) do not meet the standard. 3. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army. It established standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214. It states the DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty. It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant's EPSBD proceedings show competent medical authorities evaluated her and she was diagnosed with schizophrenia. Accordingly, the EPSBD recommended her separation. When informed of the medical findings, she concurred with them and requested discharge from the Army without delay. 2. The evidence of record shows she was in an entry-level status at the time of her separation. As a result, her service was appropriately described as "uncharacterized" in accordance with governing regulations. All requirements of law and regulation were met and her rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. 3. She implies that she has an honorable discharge and requests a change to her DD Form 214; however, her DD Form 214 shows her service was uncharacterized. 4. Uncharacterized service is not derogatory, but is used if the Soldier has not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty prior to the initiation of separation. It merely means the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160005313 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160005313 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2