| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member | |
| Mr. John P. Infante | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that her uncharacterized discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that she was separated based on a preexisting medical condition and would like to receive her Montgomery GI Bill education benefits.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 8 August 2000, she enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years for training in military occupation specialty (MOS) 88M (Motor Transport Operator).
The applicant was assigned to Fort Sill, Oklahoma to complete her MOS training and after just over 4 months of service she was processed for separation. There is no separation packet on file containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding her discharge processing. However, the evidence of record does include a properly constituted Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), authenticated by the applicant with her signature on the date of her separation, which documents the authority and reason for her discharge.
The DD Form 214 confirms that on 19 December 2000, the applicant was separated from active duty, in the rank of private/E-1, after completing 4 months and 8 days of active military service. This document also verifies that she was discharged under the provisions of paragraph 5-11, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards and that she was given an uncharacterized description of service.
On 29 June 2001, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of her discharge to honorable and found that the reason for discharge and characterization of service were proper and equitable.
Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-11 specifically provides 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 or during active duty training will be separated. A 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 the military service had it been detected at that time, and that the medical condition does not disqualify the soldier from retention in the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3.
By regulation, the characterization of service for soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will be uncharacterized if the soldier is in an entry level status. Army regulations confirm that a member is in an entry level status if the soldier has not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty prior to the initiation of separation action.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The Board noted the applicant’s desire to have her discharge upgraded to honorable in order to receive education benefits but finds this factor alone is not sufficient to warrant the requested relief.
2. By regulation, any individual who has served for less than 180 days at the time separation action is initiated, and is not being separated for misconduct, will be given an uncharacterized discharge. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was separated after completing just over 4 months of active military service and therefore, her uncharacterized discharge was appropriate.
3. There is no separation packet on file containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation processing, however, there is a properly constituted DD Form 214 on file, which was authenticated by the applicant. This document confirms that she was discharged under the provisions of paragraph 5-11, for failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards.
4. In connection with such a separation, a medical proceeding 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 the military service had it been detected at that time, and the medical condition does not disqualify the soldier from retention in the service. The regulation mandates that the characterization of service for members separating for this reason who are in an entry level status will be uncharacterized.
5. In the absence of information to the contrary, the Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met, the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process, and it presumes government regularity in the discharge process.
6. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
7. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__RJW _ __BJE __ __JPI___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001059144 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2001/08/02 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UNCHAR |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 200/12/15 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 C5 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | ELS-Medical Procurement Fitness Standards |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 189 | 110.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019024
The EPSBD found that the applicant had an unstable left knee and accordingly recommended her separation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Separations), paragraph 5-11, separation of personnel who did not meet procurement medical fitness standards. A medical proceeding conducted by an EPSBD, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within 6 months of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001687
A 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: (1) would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry into the military service had it been detected at that time and (2) does not disqualify the Soldier from retention in the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005332
However, her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows that on 12 October 2007 she was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-11 by reason of failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards with an entry level status uncharacterized discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-11 specifically provides that Soldiers who were not medically...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001377
c. The military doctor determined she was medically unacceptable for service in the Army in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), chapter 2, paragraph 2-32, and that she should be separated from the Army under the provisions of paragraph 5-11 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel). On 10 August 1990, the discharge authority approved the applicant's separation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083806C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 6 December 1996, the EPSB met and determined that the applicant’s medical condition did not meet induction standards and it recommended that she be discharged from the Army for failing to meet procurement medical fitness standards. The EPSB found that her condition existed prior to her entry into the service, and it recommended that she be discharged because she did...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029704
Title 10, U.S. Code, 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. Medical proceedings, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate military medical authority within 6 months of the Soldier's initial entrance on AD which would have permanently or temporarily disqualified him or her for entry into the military service or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022007
It states that medical proceedings must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate military medical authorities within 6 months of initial active duty training which would have temporarily or permanently disqualified the member for entry into military service had it been detected at the time of enlistment. With no evidence of any trauma occurring during her short period of military service that may have triggered her seizure disorder, it appears to have been a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100017536
On 31 October 1989, an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) evaluated her for a seizure disorder. The board found she did not meet medical fitness standards for enlistment under the provisions of Army Regulation, 635-200 (Personnel Separations Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 5-11, her conditions were EPTS, and they were not service-aggravated. A medical proceeding, regardless of the date completed, must establish that: * a medical condition was identified...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001054158C070420
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019104
The applicant requests, in effect, that item 24 (Character of Service) of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed to honorable. A 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 the military...