ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Record of Proceedings BOARD DATE: 10 February 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20180012750 APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) by: a. Changing his narrative reason for separation from "failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards" to some other unspecified but presumably more favorable reason. b. Changing his separation code from "JFW" (failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards) to "N/A" (not applicable) or "ELS" (entry level status). APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States), dated 12 August 2018 FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code (USC), Section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states: a. He does not believe an error was made by himself or his recruiter. He was enlisted by his recruiter as fully qualified and capable. He never had any conditions prior to enlisting. He withheld nothing from his recruiter, who showed good faith processing him and allowing him to enlist and ship to basic training. He believes he met procurement fitness standards. b. During basic training, he complained that he suffered from foot issues. He discovered his boots were too big, which was the reason he was experiencing discomfort. He never had pain or foot issues during running or physical training exercises. If he had been wearing the correct size boots, he would have continued his service in the Army. He apologizes for the misunderstanding but he was found to be fully qualified for enlistment. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 September 2004. Prior to his enlistment, he underwent a medical examination 9 July 2004. His DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination) shows a summary of his defects and diagnoses as "Pes Planus mild asymptomatic" and "Hallux Valgus mild Asymptomatic." The medical doctor noted on his DD Form 2808 that at the time of the examination, he was 15 pounds overweight. He was found qualified for service in the Army. 4. The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not available for review. However, his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 8 November 2004, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 5-11. He completed one month and 24 days of net active service this period, his service was uncharacterized, his separation code was "JFW," and his narrative reason for separation was "failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards." 5. The Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) found that the applicant's discharge was both proper and equitable on 18 July 2007. 6. The applicant applied to the ABCMR, requesting that his uncharacterized discharge be upgraded. The ABCMR denied the applicant's request on 25 March 2010. 7. Soldiers are considered to be in an entry-level status when they are within their first 180 days of active duty service. The evidence of record shows the applicant was still in an entry-level status at the time of his separation. As a result, his service was appropriately described as uncharacterized, in accordance with governing regulations. 8. The applicant provides no evidence that shows either the separation code or narrative reason for separation shown on his DD Form 214 are erroneous. 9. The Board should consider the applicant's statement and provided evidence in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents, evidence in the records and published DoD guidance for consideration of discharge upgrade requests. The Board considered the applicant’s statement, his record and length of service, his pre-service examination and conditions, the absence of a separation packet and the reason for his separation. The Board considered the previous considerations by the ADRB and the ABCMR. The Board found insufficient evidence to show other reasons for his separation and the applicant provided none to support his statement. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the reason and separation code reflected on the applicant’s DD Form 214 was not in error or unjust. 2. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was not warranted. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : 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. 10/22/2020 X CHAIRPERSON Signed by: MARTIN.CHARLES.MATTHEW.1074067022 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. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities and reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty and the separation codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. The separation code "JFW" is the appropriate code provided for Soldiers separating under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11, due to failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards. 3. Army Regulation 635-200 provides policy and prescribes the procedures for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 5-11 provides 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 entry on active duty will be separated. For Regular Army Soldiers, medical proceedings, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate military medical authority within six months of the Soldier's initial entrance on active duty. b. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable. However, it will be uncharacterized if the Soldier is in an entry-level status. A Soldier is in entry-level status if he or she has not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty service prior to the initiation of separation actions. 4. The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records on 25 July 2018, regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records may grant clemency regardless of the court-martial forum. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-martial; it also applies to any other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted on equity or relief from injustice grounds. a. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, Boards shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. b. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization. //NOTHING FOLLOWS//