IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 4 September 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190014300 APPLICANT REQUESTS: in effect, correction of his records to show his service was characterized as honorable. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record Under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552), dated 27 August 2019 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, in effect, he is unsure if he has an honorable discharge. He would have had no problems completing his service if not for his medical problems. He believes he should have an honorable discharge. He couldn’t finish his service due to problems with his heart, breathing, and feet. Otherwise, he would have spent his life in the military. 3. In preparation for enlistment in the U. S. Army Reserve (USAR), the applicant underwent an initial entry examination on 28 August 1986. The applicant noted he had occasional headaches and was treated with Aspirin. The examining physician found him qualified for enlistment at the time. 4. The applicant enlisted in the USAR on 5 September 1986. He entered active duty for training (ADT) on 14 November 1986, for the purpose of completing his initial entry training. 5. The applicant's service record contains the following documents: * two DA Forms 5181-R (Screening Note of Acute Medical Care) showing he was treated for migraine headaches on 21 November and 24 November 1986 and was started on Atarax for treatment * Standard Form (SF) 513 showing he was diagnosed with vascular migraine headaches that existed prior to service (EPTS) 6. A DA Form 4707 (Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) Proceedings) was initiated on 25 November 1986. This form shows the applicant was found medically unfit for enlistment due to a condition that was classified as EPTS. He was medically cleared for separation and it was recommended that he be separated from service 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). The evaluating physician's notes included the following: a. HISTORY OF PRESENT I LLNESS: This is an 18 year old male, ADA E1, Basic trainee, with a history of classic migraine headaches prior to entry into the service. This is also documented on his entry history and physical dated 28 Aug 86. The patient states that the frequency of his headaches have increased to the point that they are affecting his performance. He describes severe headache with photophobia, and visual scintillations. b. PAST MEDICAL HISTORY: Otherwise unremarkable. c. PHYSICAL EXAMINATION: The patient is a well-developed, well nourished black male in no apparent distress who is alert and oriented x 3. Blood pressure is 130/80. HEENT: exam is within normal limits. Neck is supple. Lungs are clear. Cardiac: RRR without murmur. Remainder of the examination is unremarkable. Neurologically he is intact without focality. d. DIAGNOSIS: Vascular migraine headaches. e. RECOMMENDATION: Under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501, 2- 31b(2), this patient is unfit for military service. Recommend he be separated from the military for this EPTS condition. 7. The medical approving authority approved the EPSBD findings on 1 December 1986 and the recommendation was forwarded to the Fort Leonard Wood Medical Activity (MEDDAC) commander, who approved the action on 1 December 1986. 8. The applicant was informed of the medical findings on 4 December 1986. He acknowledged his understanding that legal advice was available to him. He also understood that he may request to be discharged without delay, or to request retention on active duty. If retained he may be involuntarily reclassified into another military occupational specialty based on his medical conditions. He concurred with the proceedings and requested to be discharged without delay. 9. The applicant’s chain of command recommended approval of the applicant's discharge on 4 December 1986. 10. The separation authority approved the applicant's separation on 10 December 1986, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11. 11. The applicant’s DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) is not available for review. However his service records contain the following documents: a. Memorandum from a Fort Leonard Wood, Supervisory Military Personnel Clerk, dated 11 December 1986, showing the following: * Recommendation for separation pertaining to [applicant,] has been approved due to failure to meet medical procurement standards UP AR 635-200, para 5-11 * Soldier will be discharged with entry level separation * Separation Program Designator (SPD) is JFT b. Orders issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center Engineer and showing he was ordered to be released from ADT and discharged on 15 December 1986. 12. 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 his separation processing commenced. As a result, his service was described as "uncharacterized" in accordance with the governing regulation. 13. Based on the applicant's contention the Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) medical staff provided a medical review for the Board members. See "MEDICAL REVIEW" section. MEDICAL REVIEW: 1. The ARBA Medical Advisor was asked to review this case. Documentation reviewed included the applicant’s ABCMR application and accompanying documentation. The ARBA Medical Advisor made the following findings and recommendations: 2. The supporting documentation contains the applicant’s August 1986 pre-entrance medical history and physical examination. The applicant noted a history of headaches on his medical history and there is a note made on the examination that he had moderate pes planus, asymptomatic. He was determined to be qualified for service. 3. When seen at the troop medical clinic on 21 November 1986, he was noted to have a history of migraine headaches for which he took a medication he could not name at the time but knew he was to take 2 tablets every four hours and that they were orange. When evaluated for his headaches on 25 November 1986, the provider diagnosed the applicant with vascular migraine headaches. As they were known to have existed prior to service, he was referred to a medical board IAW Paragraph 5-11a of AR 635-200. 4. When such a medical condition is identified, the Soldier is referred to an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) convened IAW paragraph 7-12 of AR 40-400, Patient Administration. This process is for enlisted Soldiers who within their first 6 months of active service are found to have a preexisting condition which does not meet the enlistment standard in chapter 2 of AR 40-501, Standards of Medical Fitness, but does meet the chapter 3 retention standard of the same regulation. A second criterion for this process is that the preexisting condition was not permanently service aggravated. 5. The EPSBD proceedings show they convened on 25 November 1986 and note his history of headaches, “This is an 18-year-old male, Basic trainee, with a history of classic migraine headaches prior to entry into the service. This is also documented on his entry history and physical dated 28 Aug 86. The patient states that the frequency of his headaches have increased to the point that they are affecting his performance. He describes severe headache with photophobia, and visual scintillations.” The diagnosis was vascular migraine headaches and it was recommended that “he be separated from the military for this EPTS condition.” 6. The applicant concurred with the board’s finding on 4 December 1986 and initialed the box for “I concur with these proceedings and request to be discharged from the US Army without delay.” With this and the board’s finding, the applicant was then appropriately processed under the provisions of paragraph 5-11 of AR 635-200. Given the current documentation, it is the opinion of the Agency Medical Advisor that neither an upgrade of his discharge nor a referral to the disability evaluation system is warranted. ? BOARD DISCUSSION: The Board carefully considered the applicant's request, evidence in the records, and a medical review. The Board concurred with the conclusion of the ARBA Medical Advisor that the available evidence does not support changing the applicant's discharge. The applicant was an entry level Soldier separated due to an EPTS condition. As such, his service was uncharacterized in accordance with the governing regulation. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the fact that the applicant's service was uncharacterized 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 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) states that SPD codes are three-character alphabetic combinations that identify reasons for and types of separation from active duty. SPD code narrative reasons are aligned with applicable regulatory authority paragraphs. The version of the regulation in effect at the time stated that the SPD code of "JFT" is the appropriate code to assign Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11, by narrative reason of did not meet procurement medical fitness standards – no disability. 3. 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 six 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(Standards of Medical Fitness). 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) AR20190014300 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190014300 7 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190014300 6