IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE: 15 November 2023

		DOCKET NUMBER: AR20230002199


APPLICANT REQUESTS: a change to the narrative reason for separation from 
“Hardship” to “Medical.”

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD:

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
*	Medical Records

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, during his time in service, he was unable to request 
proper medical care, as well as request medical documentation.

3.  The applicant provides 

   a.	His DD Form 214 reflects he was discharged on 14 September 2013, under the 
provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative 
Separations), chapter 6-3a, hardship, with a characterization of honorable. He 
completed 1 year, 4 months, and 28 days of net active service this period. 

   b.	Medical documents (60 pages)

4.  A review of the applicant’s service records show:

	a.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 April 2012. He held military occupational 
specialty 35P, Cryptological Linguist. He was assigned to 1st Brigade Special Troop 
Battalion, 2nd Infantry Division, Korea. 

	b.  Memorandum for Record dated 9 May 2013, Subject: Request for Hardship 
Discharge, was submitted by the applicant in order to be able to take care of his mother 
due to her current medical conditions. He outlines his mother’s medical condition, as 
well as why other members of his family cannot provide the necessary care for his 
mother. The applicant also included his mother’s Certificate of Prognosis as a 
supporting document for his request.

	c.  On 16 July 2013, the applicant signed a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) that 
states “I [name] is requesting immediate separation/discharge in accordance with AR 
635-200, chapter 6, to be able to provide the necessary care needed for my mother.” 
The applicant’s commander recommended approval.

	d.  The applicant was honorably discharged from active duty on 14 September 2013.  
His DD Form 214 shows he was honorably discharged under the provisions of AR 635-
200, chapter 6-3a, due to hardship. He completed 1 year, 4 months, and 28 days of net 
active service this period. He was assigned Separation Code KDB and Reentry Code 3. 

5.  MEDICAL REVIEW:

    a.  The Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor was asked to review 
this case. Documentation reviewed included the applicant’s ABCMR application and 
accompanying documentation, the military electronic medical record (AHLTA), the VA 
electronic medical record (JLV), the electronic Physical Evaluation Board (ePEB), the 
Medical Electronic Data Care History and Readiness Tracking (MEDCHART) 
application, and the Interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System 
(iPERMS).  The ARBA Medical Advisor made the following findings and 
recommendations:  
    b.  The applicant is applying to the ABCMR in essence requesting a referral to the 
Disability Evaluation System (DES).  He states:
“Disability due to injury during service.  During service and at time of discharge, 
service member was not able to request proper medical care and was not able to 
properly request documentation.”
    c.  The Record of Proceedings details the applicant’s military service and the 
circumstances of the case.  The applicant’s DD 214 shows he entered the regular Army 
on 17 April 2012 and was discharged on 14 September 2013 under provisions provided 
in paragraph 6-3a of AR 635-200, Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations (17 
December 2009): Dependency.  However, the narrative reason is “Hardship”, which is 
paragraph 6-3b of AR 635-200 and his separation code KDB denotes “Hardship.”  
    d.  Paragraph 6-3a states: “Dependency exists when death or disability of a member 
of a soldier’s (or spouse’s) immediate family causes that member to rely upon the 
soldier for principal care or support.”
    e.  Paragraph 6-3b states: “Hardship exists when in circumstances not involving 
death or disability of a member of the soldier’s (or spouse’s) immediate family, 
separation from the Service will materially affect the care or support of the family by 
alleviating undue and genuine hardship.”
    f.  In his 9 May 2013 Memorandum for Record, the applicant requested a hardship 
discharge “to be able to take care of my mother due to her current medical condition.”  
His battalion commander recommended approval of his request on 7 August 2013 and it 
was later approved by the brigade commander.
    g.  Review of the applicant’s encounters in AHLTA shows only three clinical problems 
on his medical problem list: “Open wound of knee,” “Impetigo,” and “ Contact 
dermatitis.”  AHTLA shows that on 13 June 2012 the applicant was seen in the 
Emergency Department for “Fell into gravel rocks. Has laceration to right knee and 
multiple abrasions to right lower leg.”  The wound was irrigated and closed.  The 
applicant was placed on prophylactic antibiotics and directed to follow-up with his 
primary care provider in 72 hours.  The follow-up encounter was unavailable for review.
    h.  The applicant underwent a pre-deployment evaluation on 13 September 2012 
after which he was cleared for deployment to the Republic of Korea. 
    i.  There is no evidence the applicant had any medical condition which would have 
failed the medical retention standards of chapter 3, AR 40-501 prior to his discharge.  
Thus, there was no cause for referral to the Disability Evaluation System.  Furthermore, 
there is no evidence that any medical condition prevented the applicant from being able 
to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating prior to his 
discharge.
    j.  Review of her records in JLV confirms that he has been awarded a 10% VA 
service-connected disability rating for limited flexion of the right knee.  However, the 
DES compensates an individual only for medical condition(s) which have been 
determined to disqualify him or her from further military service.  The DES has neither 
the role nor the authority to compensate service members for anticipated future severity 
or potential complications of conditions which were incurred or permanently aggravated 
during their military service; or which did not cause or contribute to the termination of 
their military career.  That role and authority is granted by Congress to the Department 
of Veterans Affairs and executed under a different set of laws.
    k.  It is the opinion of the ARBA Medical Advisor that a referral of his case to the 
Disability Evaluation System is not warranted.
BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that 
relief was not warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicant's record of 
service, documents submitted in support of the petition and executed a comprehensive 
and standard review based on law, policy and regulation. Upon review of the applicant’s 
petition, available military records and medical review, the Board concurred with the 
advising official finding no evidence the applicant had any medical condition which 
would have failed the medical retention standards prior to his discharge.  Based on the 
preponderance of evidence there is no cause for referral to the Disability Evaluation 
System.  Furthermore, the medical opine noted, there is no evidence that any medical 
condition prevented the applicant from being able to reasonably perform the duties of 
his office, grade, rank, or rating prior to his discharge.

2.  The Board determined based on the evidence of record shows, at the time of 
separation, documentation supports the narrative reason for separation properly 
identified on the DD Form 214.  As such, the Board agreed under liberal consideration 
changes to the applicant’s narrative reason are not warranted.  Therefore, the Board 
denied relief. 


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 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.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), sets forth 
the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 6-3b states 
hardship exists in cases, not involving death or disability of a member of the Soldier's (or 
spouse's) immediate Family, that causes the Soldier’s (or spouse’s) immediate Family to 
rely upon the Soldier for principal care or support (see para 6–5 for definition of Soldier’s 
“immediate Family”) and such care or support cannot be provided while on active duty in 
the Army.

3.  Title 38 (Veterans’ Benefits), U.S. Code, § 1110 and 1131 (Basic entitlement), permit 
the Veterans Affairs to award compensation for disabilities that were incurred in or 
aggravated by active military service.  (However, an award of a higher VA rating does 
not establish error or injustice on the part of the Army.  The Army rates only conditions 
determined to be physically unfitting at the time of discharge which disqualify the Soldier 
from further military service.  The VA does not have the authority or responsibility for 
determining physical fitness for military service.  The VA awards disability ratings to 
veterans for service-connected conditions, including those conditions detected after 
discharge, to compensate the individual for loss of civilian employability.  These two 
government agencies operate under different policies.  Unlike the Army, the VA can 
evaluate a veteran throughout his or her lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability 
based upon that agency's examinations and findings.)

4.  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.  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 based on 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.  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//
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	AR20230002199


1
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1