IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 January 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190007231 APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 17 March 1995 to show she was honorably discharged. 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 9 May 2019 * Standard Form (SF) 180 (Request Pertaining to Military Records), dated 9 May 2019 * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record), dated 19 May 2019 * Physician's Memo, dated 21 February 1995 * DA Form 3947 (Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) Proceedings), dated 3 March 1995 * SF 502 (Narrative Summary [Clinical Summary]), dated 3 March 1995 * Recommendation for Separation, dated 13 March 1995 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 she sustained her physical injuries in a motor vehicle accident in June 1994. She notified her recruiter of her injuries and ongoing physical therapy requirements prior to her entry on active duty. Her condition continued to worsen and she requested a withdrawal from the delayed entry program. She provided all necessary documentation to her recruiter. The recruiter advised her that once at her destination, a withdrawal would be granted to her with no penalty to her record. He did not provide her the correct information. The discharge she received was improper and inequitable. The separation code and characterization of service were improper because her pre-service medical condition was properly discussed with her recruiter prior to entry. All of this could have been avoided had her recruiter filed the withdrawal as she requested. Additionally, she has been a licensed peace officer in the State of Texas for 19 years. She would like to clear this matter up for future employment purposes. 3. The applicant was seen by a physician on 21 February 1995, who confirmed the diagnosis of her injury as related to her motor vehicle accident. 4. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 February 1995. She was sent to Fort Jackson, SC, to conduct her initial entry training. 5. The applicant underwent an MEB on 3 March 1995. The relevant DA Form 3947 and Narrative Summary confirmed the following: * she had an unfitting medical condition under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), which existed prior to service * the condition was not permanently aggravated by military service * it was recommended the applicant be separated from service for failure to meet medical procurement standards and medical retention standards under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501 * she was informed of her right to appeal the proceeding and legal counsel was made available 6. The applicant was counseled by her immediate commander on or about 13 March 1995 and elected to request separation. The separation action was approved on or about 13 March 1995. 7. The applicant's record is void of a separation packet documenting her discharge processing. However, the DD Form 214 she was issued shows she was discharged on 17 March 1995, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-11, by reason of failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards. She was credited with completing 26 days of net active service and was not awarded a military occupational specialty. Her service was uncharacterized. 8. 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 in an entry-level status at the time her separation processing commenced. As a result, her service was described as "uncharacterized" in accordance with governing regulations. 9. The Board should consider the applicant's statement in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: The Board carefully considered the applicant's request, supporting documents, and evidence in the records. The Board agreed that her entry-level discharge was supported by the record, and the Board found insufficient evidence of mitigating circumstances that would have warranted characterizing her service as honorable. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the applicant's uncharacterized service as a result of her discharge while in an entry-level status was not in error or unjust. 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, 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 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 3 provides that a separation will be described as entry level with uncharacterized service if the Soldier has less than 180 days of continuous active duty service at the time separation action is initiated. b. Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. c. Paragraph 3-9, in effect at the time of the applicant's separation, provided 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: (1) a discharge under other than honorable conditions was authorized, due to the reason for separation and 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. d. 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. 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. e. 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. An uncharacterized discharge is neither favorable nor unfavorable; in the case of Soldiers issued this characterization of service, an insufficient amount of time would have passed to evaluate the Soldier's conduct and performance. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190007231 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190007231 5 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190007231 4