IN THE CASE OF: 
 
  BOARD DATE: 22 August 2023 
 
  DOCKET NUMBER: AR20230000556 
 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS:  upgrade of her uncharacterized discharge to a more favorable discharge. 
 
APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 
 
• DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) 

• Medical Documents 

• DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) 

• Georgia Department of Driver Services, Certificate of Veterans Eligibility 

• Email 


 
FACTS: 
 
1.  The applicant did not file within the 3-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 during basic training one of her fellow privates jumped from the second floor in front of her. She was young and traumatized during basic training. She has nightmares constantly due to being in the service. She is not eligible for any health benefits or able to seek counsel. She was not able to wear combat boots due to her feet; however, she was discharged as existed prior to service (EPTS). She never had issues with her feet before and didn’t question the decisions of the physicians or the powers above her. After discharge, she kept her military identification until she went to the Department of Veterans Affairs in Albany, Georgia, where it was taken. She is not asking for full benefits. She is trying to obtain a veteran’s license in the State. The status needs to be changed for her to obtain a veteran license or tag for her vehicle. On her DD Form 149, the applicant indicates post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is related to her request. 
 
3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 February 1996 for 3 years. She did not complete training and was not awarded a military occupational specialty.  
 
4.  The applicant's record is void of a separation packet containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding her discharge processing however, Orders 072-1305, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center, Fort Jackson, SC on 12 March 1996, transferred her to the separation point for discharge processing. 
 
5.  The applicant was discharged on 14 March 1996. Her DD Form 214 shows she was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations-Enlisted Personnel) 635-200, Paragraph 5-11, by reason of failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards. She completed 1 month and 7 days of net active service. Her service was uncharacterized (Separation Code JFW, Reentry Code 3). 
 
6.  Soldiers are considered to be in an entry-level status when they are within their first 180 days of active-duty service. An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier’s military service. It simply means the Soldier was not in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. 
 
7.  The applicant provides: 
 
     a.  A profile sheet, dated 23 February 1996, from the Moncrief Army Community Hospital, podiatry clinic with a diagnosis of bilateral bunions, secondary pes planus and a thirty-day profile. An instructions sheet, dated 19 March 1996, provides instructions and a medication prescription. 
 
     b.  A Department of Driver Services form regarding eligibility for veteran’s driver’s license/identification card. 
 
     c.  An email, dated 28 February 2023, in response to a request for medical documents regarding her PTSD. The applicant states that the box should not have been checked as she knows the physician is deceased and his practice closed years ago. She wouldn’t be able to provide the information for PTSD. 
 
8.  In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition, arguments and assertions, and service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency guidance.  
 
9.  MEDICAL REVIEW: 
 
    a.  The Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor reviewed the supporting documents, the Record of Proceedings (ROP), and the applicant's available records in the Interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS), and in the VA's Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV).  The applicant requests a change in characterization of service from ‘Uncharacterized’ to ‘Honorable’.  She stated that she 
was discharged for an EPTS condition (existed prior to service) and implied that the condition was related to foot issues.  She contends that she never had foot issues prior to service. 
 
    b.  The ABCMR ROP was reviewed.  The applicant was in service from 19960208 to 19960314.  The complete facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge from service were not available for review.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that she was discharged for failure to not meet procurement medical fitness standards.  She was in service for 5 weeks and her service was designated as ‘uncharacterized’.   
 
    c.  There were no service treatment records available for review with the exception of the following:  The submitted record included a 30-day temporary physical profile dated 23Feb1996 written by podiatry specialty for Bilateral Bunions Secondary to Pes Planus.  Among the restrictions were no running, no marching, and no jumping; and no lifting over 10 pounds. The submitted record also included a prescription for Endal HD which can be used to treat cold and flu symptoms.   
 
    d.  In her application, she also stated that she was traumatized while in basic training---she witnessed a fellow private jump from the second floor in front of her.  She implied that she had constant nightmares following this event.  She checked the ‘PTSD’ box indicating that this diagnosis was related to her application request (on DD Form 149 dated 06Oct2022); however, in 28Feb2023 email correspondence with ABCMR, she indicated that she would not be able to retrieve records because the physician had passed, and his practice was closed.   
 
    e.  5.  JLV records indicated that the applicant had not been service connected by the VA for any disabilities.  There were no VA facility treatment records.  VA community partner records (starting in 2021) showed a 05Aug2023 admission for Suicide Ideation (with a plan to ingest 2 bottles of her psychotropic medications she was carrying when the plan was interrupted).  She reported a 19-year history of depression with Major Depressive Disorder and Bipolar 1 Disorder diagnoses.  This would have been around 2003 which was approximately 7 years after discharge from service.  The applicant’s sister stated that she had been diagnosed with bipolar depression 24 years prior, possibly due to "stress at work."   The applicant endorsed being suicidal since 2010.  She reported two prior interrupted suicide attempts (2022 and 2023), auditory and visual hallucinations of deceased relatives, and chronic insomnia.  She had worked for Quest Lab Diagnostics for the last 19 years and was currently working from home as a genetics assistant/coordinator.  The reported stressors appeared to be work related.  No mention was made of military stressors or issues related to her time in military service. 
 
    f.  Based on the applicant’s statements, she was reportedly told that her bilateral foot condition was EPTS.  An Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) Proceedings 
record was not found.  The temporary profile dated 2 weeks after entrance on active duty, documents the breadth and depth of restrictions caused by the bilateral foot condition very soon after beginning service.  Therefore, in the opinion of the ARBA medical advisor, it is credible that the bilateral foot condition was ETPS; that this was the reason for not meeting procurement medical fitness standards; and finally, that the bilateral foot condition was the reason for her discharge.   
 
    g.  The applicant’s statements concerning being traumatized and self-report of PTSD are acknowledged.  However, based on records available for review, there was insufficient evidence to support that PTSD or other behavioral health condition failed medical retention standards of AR 40-501 chapter 3 or was the reason for her separation from service.  And further, there was no indication in the applicant’s statements or in the available records, that would lead one to reasonably conclude that the applicant experienced psychosis or MST; or performed an extreme act of heroism while in the military that might warrant a change in characterization of service from ‘Uncharacterized’ to ‘Honorable’.  Recommendation: Neither a change in characterization of service, nor a change in narrative reason for discharge is warranted based on records currently available for review.  However, the applicant’s self-assertion of PTSD alone is sufficient under liberal consideration to merit consideration of upgrade by the board.  
 
BOARD DISCUSSION: 
 
After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The applicant’s contentions, the military record, and regulatory guidance were carefully considered. The applicant’s separation packet is not available for review. However, her DD Form 214 shows she was in an entry-level status at the time of her separation due to failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards. She completed 1 month and 7 days of active service, and her service was uncharacterized. Soldiers are considered in an entry-level status when they are within their first 180 days of active-duty service. An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier’s military service. It simply means the Soldier was not in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated. The Board reviewed and was persuaded by the medical official’s insufficient evidence to support that PTSD or other behavioral health condition failed medical retention standards of AR 40-501 chapter 3 or was the reason for her separation from service. Additionally, there was no indication in the applicant’s statements or in the available records, that would lead one to reasonably conclude that the applicant experienced psychosis or MST. 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. 
 
 
BOARD VOTE: 
 
Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 
 
: : : GRANT FULL RELIEF 
 
: : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 
 
: : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING 
 
xx: xx: xx: 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. 
 
  8/22/2023

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 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 ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 
 
2.  Title 10, USC, Section 1556, provides the Secretary of the Army shall ensure that an applicant seeking corrective action by ARBA is provided a copy of all correspondence and communications, including summaries of verbal communications, with any agencies or persons external to agency or board, or a member of the staff of the agency or 
Board, that directly pertains to or has material effect on the applicant's case, except as authorized by statute.  
 
3.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations-Enlisted Personnel), in effect at the time, sets policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the force while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Soldiers for a variety of reasons. 
 
 a.  Chapter 3 states 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.  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 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 (Standards of Medical Fitness). 
 
 d.  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. 
 
3.  The Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRB) and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NR), on 3 September 2014, to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations, and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members administratively discharged under other than honorable conditions and who have been diagnosed with PTSD by a competent mental health professional representing a civilian healthcare provider in order to determine if it would be appropriate to upgrade the characterization of the applicant's service.  
4.  The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided clarifying guidance to Service DRBs and Service BCM/NRs on 25 August 2017. The memorandum directed them to give liberal consideration to veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury, sexual assault, or sexual harassment. Standards for review should rightly consider the unique nature of these cases and afford each veteran a reasonable opportunity for relief even if the sexual assault or sexual harassment was unreported, or the mental health condition was not diagnosed until years later. Boards are to give liberal consideration to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on those conditions or experiences.  
 
5.  The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Service DRBs and Service BCM/NRs on 25 July 2018, 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 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//