BOARD DATE:	  26 March 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140012362 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests correction of her uncharacterized entry-level separation to show she was medically discharged with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of RE-1 instead of RE-3.

2.  The applicant states her narrative reason for separation is inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident.

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* DD Form 4707 (Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB) Proceedings) 
* 6 letters
* a memorandum
* a self-authored statement
* DA Form 4856 (Developmental Counseling Form)
* 4-page performance evaluation
* Standard Form (SF) 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care)

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

1.  Counsel requests correction of the applicant's uncharacterized entry-level separation to show she was medically discharged with an RE code of RE-1 instead of RE-3.


2.  Counsel states:

   a.  The applicant injured her right ankle on 19 August 2013.  During the applicant's injury a noncommissioned officer had the applicant's doctor’s orders changed, which would have allowed the applicant the proper method to repair her injury.  It took approximately a week before she could see the proper authority to be medically approved to ship.  In the meantime, the applicant was placed with the hold-over Soldiers.  These Soldiers were trying to go home rather than ship to basic training.

   b.  During this waiting period, the applicant was trying to heal from her injury and keep herself busy.  However, she was having problems with a few of the hold-over Soldiers.  On or about 26 August 2013, the applicant's crutches were pulled from under her by one of the hold-over Soldiers she was having problems with, causing her to fall.  The incident infuriated the applicant and she engaged in a verbal argument with the Soldier.

   c.  A drill sergeant witnessed the altercation and took the applicant aside to calm her down and wait for the emergency medical technician to arrive.  On the ride to the hospital, the applicant rode on the ambulance with the hold-over Soldiers, whom she was having problems with.  This infuriated the applicant even more.  She was severely agitated and she was given a shot of Lorazepam.

   d.  Upon her return to Fort Jackson, she met with Dr. J_____ who diagnosed her positive attitude and interest in how all of the military operates as a mental disorder.  The shot of Lorazepam she received had an adverse effect and distorted the evaluation by Dr. J_____.  Through all of the applicant's discharge documents, she disagreed and requested a medical board assessment because she believed the diagnosis of Dr. J_____ to be unfitting.

   e.  The applicant was 25 years old at the time of her discharge.  The inequitable narrative reason for separation she received has put a strain on her life and career.  The aforementioned incident was an isolated event and unique in nature. The applicant had never had previous nor subsequent episodes regarding her mental health.  The applicant did not want to be held back from training due to her injury.  This caused the applicant severe distress.
   
   f.  The applicant tried to keep a positive attitude even though she was going through a difficult time with her injury.  However, she was pushed to her breaking point by a few of the hold-over Soldiers.  When the applicant was physically harmed by one of them it caused her to have a breakdown.  However, this isolated incident only occurred once.  She has never had a similar event happen prior to her enlistment in the Army nor has she had a similar event occur after being discharged.
   
   g.  According to Dr. K___:  "It is my opinion that [the applicant] did indeed suffer a maniac [sic] episode in 2013.  The onset was swift, likely over a period of days caused by stress of an injury sustained during reception, and was resolved shortly after.  There was no evidence for a mood disorder prior to her military experience.  She appeared to be symptom-free and on no medication when I saw her in March."
   
   h.  The applicant wishes to reenlist in the military.  Her ultimate goal is to specialize in explosive ordnance.  She has continued to maintain a suitable weight for enlistment in order to be eligible to reenlist.  She has continued to keep fit by taking several classes and by participating in obstacle and endurance races.  She continues to participate in Future Soldier Training from a local recruiter in her home town.
   
	i.  She is currently employed by Nordstrom.  Her current manager gave the applicant a great performance evaluation.  Recently, she received a promotion from the women's clothing department to the store's stock and inventory management.  In this position, the applicant is responsible for merchandise before it enters the store.  This position is a major accomplishment for the applicant.  Additionally, she has completed some college before entering the military.  After her unfortunate discharge, she has continued her college education with American Military University.  She is currently working on her Associate of Science degree in explosive ordnance disposal.  After completing her degree she will continue her education by attaining a Bachelor of Science  degree in either electrical or chemical engineering.

	j.  The applicant has gone above and beyond to meet the enlistment requirements to include having a tattoo removed from above her neckline in order to qualify for Army Regulation 670-1 (Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia).  She has continued to work very hard to focus on her mental and physical being to reach her goal of being a U.S. Army officer.

	k.  The applicant has several letters of recommendation from individuals that attest to her reliability, trustworthiness, and good judgment.

3.  Counsel provides a 5-page brief in support of the applicant's request.




CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG) on 29 July 2013.  On 14 August 2013, she entered active duty for training at Fort Jackson, SC.

2.  Her record contains an SF 600, dated 18 August 2013, which shows the applicant rolled her ankle while walking.  She was subsequently treated for a right ankle sprain and received an Ace wrap, crutches, Naproxen, and 48 hour medical quarters.  Based on the applicant's impending ship date, her profile was amended and she was ordered to ice, elevate and rest in the unit to facilitate her ability to ship to training.

3.  Her records contain a DA Form 4707 which shows she was diagnosed with bipolar I disorder, manic episode, severe without psychotic features (existed prior to service), right ankle sprain, and stress of military training. 

4.  Her DA Form 4707 also shows after careful consideration of her medical records, laboratory findings, and medical examination, the board recommended the applicant be separated from the U.S. Army for failing to meet medical procurement standards of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), chapter 2, paragraph 2-27(d). 

5.  On 29 August 2013, the medical approving authority approved the findings of the EPSB and noted that retention was not practical. 

6.  On 5 September 2013, the applicant indicated she understood that legal advice of an attorney employed by the Army was available to her or she could consult with civilian counsel at her own expense.  She could request to be discharged without delay or request to be retained and involuntarily reclassified into another military occupational specialty based on her medical condition.  The applicant's record is void of any evidence she sought Army or civilian counsel. However, the applicant indicated that she disagreed with the proceedings because she believed her condition was not disqualifying on entry and was aggravated by service.  Therefore, she requested her case be returned to the medical approving authority for reconsideration.

7.  On 6 September 2013, the applicant's EPSB Proceedings were forwarded to the applicant's unit for appropriate action in accordance with paragraph 5-11 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel).

8.  On 10 September 2013, an inpatient psychiatrist, Moncrief Army Community Hospital stated:
   a.  "During the course of completing [the applicant's] psychiatric interview and reviewing her history, information was obtained in support of the gradual worsening of her mood disturbance in the weeks to months prior to arrival at Fort Jackson.  Such information includes a history of grandiosity, impulsive behaviors, and excessive involvement in pleasurable activities (multiple tattoos and body piercings, increased travel, speeding tickets).  In addition, her command reported increasingly disruptive behaviors from the time of arrival to the 120th Adjutant General Battalion."

   b.  "Despite ongoing education about her psychiatric condition, [the applicant] exhibits poor insight.  She does not believe that she has a psychiatric illness nor requires medications for management of her illness.  This denial has led to her refusal to participate in the Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5-11 separation process."

9.  On 16 September 2013, the discharge authority approved the applicant's separation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11, by reason of failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards.

10.  The DD Form 214 she was issued shows her service was uncharacterized and she was released from active duty training, discharged from the Reserve of the Army, and returned to the ARNG under the provisions of paragraph 5-11 of Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of failure to meet medical/physical procurement standards.  The form also shows she completed a total of 1 month and 6 days of creditable service.  Item 26 (Separation Code) of this form shows the entry "JFW" and item 27 (RE Code) shows the entry "3."

11.  The applicant and counsel provide:

   a.  Several letters of character reference/support from friends, co-workers, and other associates.  The letters attest to her strength of character, professionalism, performance of her responsibilities, determination, and general willingness to help others; however, none of the letters address the circumstances that led to her discharge.

   b.  A letter from a psychiatrist at Beth Israel Medical Center, dated 21 April 2014, who states, he believes the applicant suffered a manic episode in 2013.  The onset was swift, likely over a period of days caused by stress of an injury sustained during reception, and was resolved shortly after.  He opines there was no evidence for a mood disorder prior to her military service and she appeared to be entirely symptom-free and on no medication when he saw her in March.  While there is no guarantee that she would not suffer such an episode again, he believes she will do well from a psychiatric standpoint.

12.   Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel	

	a.  Paragraph 5-11 specifically provides that Soldiers who are 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 will be separated.  A medical proceeding conducted by an EPSB, 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, the condition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry into the military service had it been detected at the time of enlistment, and the medical condition does not disqualify the Soldier from retention in the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3.  The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision will normally be honorable, but will be uncharacterized if the Soldier has not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty service prior to the initiation of separation action.

	b.  An uncharacterized separation is an entry-level separation.  A separation will be described as an entry-level separation if processing is initiated while a member is in entry-level status, except when characterization under other than honorable conditions is authorized by the reason for separation and is warranted by the circumstances of the case or when the Secretary of the Army, on a case-by-case basis, determines that characterization of service as honorable is clearly warranted by the presence of unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance of duty.

13.  Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) governs the evaluation of physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability.  It states that according to accepted medical principles, certain abnormalities and residual conditions exist that, when discovered, lead to the conclusion that they must have existed or have started before the individual entered the military service.  Examples are manifestation of lesions or symptoms of chronic disease from date of entry on active military service (or so close to that date of entry that the disease could not have started in so short a period) will be accepted as proof that the disease existed prior to entrance into active military service.

14.  Army Regulation 635-200 further states that prior to discharge or release from active duty individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the U.S. Army Reserve.  Table 3-1 included a list of the RA RE codes:

		(1)  RE-1 applies to Soldiers completing their term of active service who are considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army.  They are qualified for enlistment if all other criteria are met.

		(2)  RE-2 is no longer used, effective 1995.

   (3)  RE-3 applies to Soldiers who are not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waivable.  They are ineligible unless a waiver is granted.

   (4)  RE-4 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service and the disqualification is not waivable.

15.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) prescribes the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons.  The regulation shows that the SPD "JFW" as shown on the applicant's DD Form 214 specifies the narrative reason for discharge as "Failure to Meet Procurement Medical Fitness Standards" and that the authority for discharge under this SPD is "Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11."

16.  Army Regulation 40-501 governs medical fitness standards for induction, enlistment, appointment, retention, separation, retirement, officer procurement programs and related policies and procedures.  Chapter 2 provides standards for medical procurement.  Paragraph 2–27d states current mood disorders including, but not limited to, major depression, bipolar, affective psychoses, depressive not otherwise specified, do not meet the standard.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant and her counsel contend the applicant's uncharacterized entry-level separation should be corrected to show she was medically discharged with a reentry eligibility code of RE-1 instead of RE-3.

2.  The applicant's and her counsel's contentions have been noted; however, the evidence of record shows the applicant suffered from a disqualifying medical condition that existed prior to her service.  According to accepted medical principles, the manifestation of a chronic disease from date of entry on active military service (or so close to that date of entry that the disease could not have started in so short a period) is accepted as proof that the disease existed prior to entrance into active military service.

3.  Consequently, her records were evaluated by an EPSB.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

4.  The RE code she was assigned is based on the fact she was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11, by reason of failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards.  The appropriate separation code associated with this type of discharge is "JFW" and the corresponding       RE code associated with this separation code and type of discharge is RE-3.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary it is presumed she received the appropriate RE code associated with her discharge.

4.  The ABCMR does not establish eligibility for entry into the Army nor does it correct records solely for the purpose of establishing eligibility for other programs or benefits.  The applicant is advised that if she desires to reenter military service, she should contact a local recruiter who can best advise her on her eligibility for returning to military service.  Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the service at the time and are responsible for processing requests for enlistment waivers.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is insufficient evidence to support the requested relief.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  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 that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      __________x_____________
               CHAIRPERSON
      
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.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140012362





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140012362



9


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1