BOARD DATE:  26 June 2020

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20190001356


APPLICANT REQUESTS: her uncharacterized discharge be changed to a 
medical discharge.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD:

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	DD Form 689 (Individual Sick Slip)

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United 
States Code, section 1552(b); however, the 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, in effect, it was proven she could not complete training due to a 
medical injury.  Due to the length of time it took to receive the proper diagnosis and 
treat, her injury has caused hardship.  She had difficulty standing and performing basic 
household chores.  She is currently receiving treatment for the injury.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army 29 July 2013.

4.  On 21 August 2013, an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) found the 
applicant medically unfit for enlistment in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501 
(Standards of Medical Fitness), paragraph 2-10c(4) due to joint pain in left knee.  The 
EPSBD noted the applicant's medical records revealed she had a left medial meniscal 
repair and a left knee total synovectomy in March 2012.  Her knee pain restarted while 
trying to meet the demands of training. The EPSBD recommended the applicant be 
separated from the Army for failure to meet medical procurement standards.  

5.  On 4 September 2013, the applicant was informed of the medical findings.  She 
acknowledged she understood legal advice of an attorney employed by the Army was 
available to her or that she could consult civilian counsel at his own expense.  She also 
acknowledged she understood she could request to be discharged without delay or to 
request retention on active duty.  If retained, she could be involuntarily reclassified into 
another military occupational specialty based upon her medical condition.  On the same 
date, she concurred with the proceedings and requested to be discharged from the U.S. 
Army without delay.  The applicant's commander recommended her separation from the 
U.S. Army and on 5 September 2013, the separation approving authority directed her 
discharge from the U.S. Army.

6.  The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) 
shows he was discharged on 21 December 1994, under the provisions of Army 
Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-11 
(Separation of personnel who did not meet procurement medical fitness standards), 
after completing 1 month and 14 days of net active service this period, with an 
"uncharacterized" characterization of service.

7.  The Army Review Board Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor reviewed the supporting 
documents and the applicant's records in iPERMS, the Armed Forces Health 
Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), Health Artifacts Image Management 
Solutions (HAIMS) and the VA's Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV) and made the following 
findings and recommendations: In the 05Nov2012 Report of Medical History, the 
applicant disclosed a previous history of left knee meniscectomy.  A 12Apr2010 note 
reveals the applicant had a 3 year history of knee pain and sports injuries from soccer 
and tennis (middle school age).  She had a Left knee ACL and meniscus surgery in 
March 2012.  She was cleared to return to regular activity including clearance for a sport 
competition in Oct 2012.  However, a 09 Aug 2013 AHLTA note shows she complained 
of knee pain in week 2 of BCT.  21 Aug 2013 Entrance Physical Standards Board 
Proceeding s indicated she was unable to march or run and had fallen behind in 
training. She denied recent injury. The knee pain did not meet procurement standards 
and it existed prior to service.  There was no recent injury/trauma to support service 
aggravation.  JLV search shows the applicant is 20% total combined service connection 
for following VA rated disabilities: Limited Flexion of Knee (10%); Knee Condition (0%); 
Limited motion of the ankle (10%) and Scars (0%).  The applicant was not treated for an 
ankle nor for a scar condition during service.  A review of the available documentation 
did not find medical evidence which would support a change or reason for the discharge 
in this case.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11, in effect at the time, 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.

9.  Army Regulation 635-40 (Disability Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or 
Separation) establishes PDES and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures 
that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to 
reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating.  


BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting and evidence in 
the records.  The Board considered the applicant’s statement, her record and length of 
service, her medical condition, the determination of the EPSBD regarding that condition 
and the reason for her separation.  The Board considered the review by medical 
advising official that included a review of the applicant’s VA records and agreed with the 
conclusions.  Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the 
character of service the applicant received upon separation 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.



		  
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, United States 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 ABCMR to excuse an applicant's 
failure to timely file within the 3 year statute of limitations if the Army Board for 
Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) determines it would be in the interest of justice 
to do so.

2.  Army Regulation sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  
Paragraph 3-9, in effect at the time of the applicant's separation, provides that a 
separation would be described as entry level with uncharacterized service if processing 
was initiated while a Soldier was in an entry-level status, except when:

     a.  An under other than honorable conditions characterization was authorized by the 
reason for separation and was warranted by the circumstances of the case; or

     b.  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.

3.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11, in effect at the time, 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 character of service for 
Soldiers separated under this provision would normally be honorable, but would be 
uncharacterized if the Soldier was in an entry-level status.

     a.  Entry-level status is defined as the first 180 days of continuous active service for
Regular Army Soldiers.

     b.  An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a
Soldier's military service.  It merely means the Soldier has not served on active duty 
long enough for his or her character of service to be rated.

4.  Army Regulation 635-40 establishes PDES and sets forth policies, responsibilities, 
and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical 
disability to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating.  Only the 
unfitting conditions or defects and those which contribute to unfitness will be considered 
in arriving at the rated degree of incapacity warranting separation for disability.  
     a.  The disability system assessment process involves two distinct stages:  the 
Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).  The purpose of 
the MEB is to determine whether the service member’s injury or illness is severe 
enough to compromise his or her ability to return to full duty based on the job specialty 
designation of the branch of service.  A PEB is an administrative body possessing the 
authority to determine whether or not a service member is fit for duty.  A designation of 
"unfit for duty" is required before an individual can be separated from the military 
because of an injury or medical condition.  Service members who are determined to be 
unfit for duty due to disability are either separated from the military or are permanently 
retired, depending on the severity of the disability and length of military service.  
Individuals who are "separated" receive a one-time severance payment, while veterans 
who retire based upon disability receive monthly military retirement payments and have 
access to all other benefits afforded to military retirees. 
     b.  The mere presence of a medical impairment does not in and of itself justify a 
finding of unfitness.  In each case, it is necessary to compare the nature and degree of 
physical disability present with the requirements of the duties the Soldier may 
reasonably be expected to perform because of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating.  
Reasonable performance of the preponderance of duties will invariably result in a 
finding of fitness for continued duty.  A Soldier is physically unfit when a medical 
impairment prevents reasonable performance of the duties required of the Soldier's 
office, grade, rank, or rating.
//NOTHING FOLLOWS//
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20190001356


6

ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1