ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Record of Proceedings BOARD DATE: 14 February 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190012055 APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show his service is characterized as honorable or general in lieu of “uncharacterized.” APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Personal Statement * Bachelor of Arts in Christian Ministry * Associates in Christian Ministry * Certificate of Appreciation – Vets Incorporated * Picture of the applicant training a service dog FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records 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 his service began on 26 May 1999. He was a member of the Army National Guard (ARNG) for 7 months before he was sent to active duty. He went to drill faithfully. His total ARNG service equals 10 months and 23 days. He does not believe that his discharge document should show he was discharged in an entry level status. 3. In a personal statement the applicant indicates: a. An ARNG Soldier can be enlisted over a 6 month period, but not have 180 days of active service. His entry physical revealed he was physically fit for military training. He completed boot camp without incident. His physical fitness record provides proof that he was healthy. His injury occurred during his last few weeks of training at Fort Benning, GA. He fell during an early morning company run and hurt his wrist. He reported the incident to his drill instructor (sergeant (SGT) M and to a SGT D. They told him he only had 2 weeks left, if he wanted to graduate to suck it up. He did not push the issue he wanted to graduate. When he arrived in Missouri, the pain continued and he went to the doctor. b. His commander told him that his discharge would be honorable. c. He is a current honor guard member, and he has served as an honor guard for 14 years. Honor guard members receive funeral and health services as incarcerated members. d. As a member of the Prisoners Assisting Warrior Service (PAWS) program, he trains service dogs to assist the needs of veterans who come home with posttraumatic stress disorder and physical disabilities. It is a volunteer program and he has been a member for 3 years. The dogs are given to local veterans free of charge. He received his Bachelor’s Degree in Christian Therapy and he serves as a counselor and minister. 4. The applicant's service records show: a. He enlisted into the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), on 26 May 1999, for an 8-year term. He was ordered to initial active duty for training (IADT), on 4 January 2000, and was transferred to Fort Benning, GA, for basic training. b. Medical Records, dated 30 March 2000, shows the applicant had a: * Ganglion cyst on his left wrist; he also had scars that were well healed, “cut on window glass” * GWS (gunshot wound) to the forearm 5. A Physical Profile shows, on 30 March 2000, the applicant was given a temporary profile with an expiration date of 30 April 2000, for left arm injury – EPTS (existed prior to service). 6. On 30 March 2000, an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) found after careful consideration of medical records, laboratory findings, and medical examination that the applicant was medically unfit for appointment or enlistment in accordance with current medical fitness standards and in the opinion of the evaluating physicians the condition was an EPTS condition. He had the following medical conditions and/or physical defects (brief narrative summary). a. Chief Complaint: Left Arm Weakness and Left Wrist Pain, EPTS. b. History of Present Illness: He was a 20-year-old male in his first week of advanced individual training (AIT) after completing basic training at Fort Benning. He experienced a GSW to the left forearm approximately 4 months ago and had residual weakness to the median nerve distribution. He was able to complete basic training, but with significant difficulties and after arrival at Fort Leonard Wood, MO, the pain to the wrist increased to the point where he was unable to perform exercises. He was also having difficulty with use of the wrist in the cold weather. He was seen in occupational therapy and the “CTMC” and referred to orthopedics for evaluation. c. Physical Examination: Determined his left forearm has well-healed entrance and exit wounds to the proximal one-third of the forearm. There was no swelling. Wrist flexion and extension were essentially full. Muscle strength was significantly decreased, 4/5, with dorsiflexion and extension of the wrist. “FDS, FDP and interossei were intact but weak.” Distal pulse and sensory is intact. Left grip was 30 pounds, and right grip was 95 pounds. There was moderate pain with palpation to the anatomic snuffbox and a large ganglion cyst was noted to the dorsum of the hand. d. X-Ray Data: Radiographs a nonunion of the scaphoid with significant collapse and cystic formations. e. Impression: * Probable median nerve injury status post gunshot wound * Scaphoid fracture, nonunion, symptomatic * Ganglion cyst f. The EPSBD recommended separation due to an EPTS medical condition. On 3 April 2000, the findings were approved. 7. On 13 April 2000, the applicant concurred with the EPSDB findings and requested discharge. On the same date, the separation authority directed the applicant's discharge. 8. On 18 April 2000, the applicant was discharged under AR 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-11 (Separation of Personnel Who Did Not Meet Procurement Medical Fitness Standards with uncharacterized service. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 3 months and 15 days of net active service. 9. On 30 May 2000, he was discharged from the Louisiana ARNG with uncharacterized service. 10. On 17 November 2004, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed his discharge but found it proper and equitable. The ADRB unanimously voted to deny him a change in the character of service and the reason for discharge. 11. The applicant provides a Bachelor of Arts in Christian Ministry and an Associates in Christian Ministry from the New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, a Certificate of Appreciation from the Veterans Incorporated, and a picture of the applicant training a service dog to be given to a disabled veteran. 12. AR 635-200 required Soldiers to be separated when they did not meet procurement medical fitness standards. a. Medical proceedings had to establish that medical authority identified the disqualifying medical condition(s) within 6 months of the Soldier's initial entrance on active duty, the condition(s) would have permanently or temporarily disqualified him for IADT, had it been identified earlier. b. In addition, Soldiers who were in an entry-level status (i.e. the first 180 days of continuous active service) were required to receive an uncharacterized character of service. The Secretary of the Army could, on a case-by-case basis, issue an honorable character of service to entry-level Soldiers when it was clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving personal conduct or duty performance. 13. Regarding the applicant’s contention that he was healthy; fell and hurt his wrist during the last few weeks of basic training. Medical evidence show he experienced a GSW to the left forearm shortly before entering basic training and he had residual weakness to the median nerve distribution. He was able to complete basic training, but with significant difficulties and after arrival at AIT, the pain to the wrist increased to the point where he was unable to perform exercise and he had difficulty with the use of his wrist in cold weather. His medical condition was preexisting and he would not have been allowed to enlist had it been discovered. 14. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant's petition, his service record, his medical condition, and his statements in light of the published guidance on equity, injustice, or clemency. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, to include the DoD guidance on liberal consideration when reviewing discharge upgrade requests, the Board determined that relief was not warranted. Based upon a documentary review of the applicant’s military record, the Board concluded that the applicant completed a period of active duty but, during that period of active service, he failed to be complete IET and was not awarded a MOS. Based upon regulatory guidance, the Board concluded there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice which would warrant a change to the characterization of service. An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier’s military service. 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. As a result, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request. 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. 10/16/2020 X. 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 Army Board for Correction of Military Records (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. AR 635-200, in effect at the time, prescribed policies and procedures for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel. a. An honorable discharge was a separation with honor. The honorable characterization was appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally met the standards of acceptable conduct and duty performance. b. A general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Paragraph 3-9 (Uncharacterized Separations). Soldiers separated in an entry- level status receive an uncharacterized character of service. A separation is an entry level status separation if its processing is initiated during the Soldier's first 180 days of continuous active duty. The Secretary of the Army could, on a case-by-case basis, issue an honorable character of service to entry-level Soldiers when clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving personal conduct or duty performance. d. Paragraph 5-11 specifically 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 entry on active duty, active duty for training, or initial entry training were to be separated. (1) The regulation required an EPSBD be convened; this board assessed a Soldier's medical condition(s) and determined whether appropriate medical authority had identified these conditions within 6 months of the Soldier's initial entrance on active duty. Additionally, the board had to show the condition would have temporarily or permanently disqualified the Soldier for entry into the military service, had it been detected at the time of enlistment. (2) An uncharacterized character of service was issued to Soldiers who had not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty service prior to the initiation of separation action. The regulation considered these Soldiers to be in an entry-level status. 3. On 25 July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the type of court-martial. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court- martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. 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, BCM/NRs 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//