IN THE CASE OF:  	  

		BOARD DATE:  28 July 2015	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140020914 


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 an upgrade of his uncharacterized discharge to honorable.  He also requests a personal appearance hearing.

2.  The applicant states:

* his National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) shows his character of service as uncharacterized 
* the NGB Form 22 is unclear as to what uncharacterized means; he would like to upgrade that to honorable 
* when he enlisted, he passed the physical and completed basic combat training 
* when he returned to complete advanced individual training (AIT), he was examined by the same physician who determined that he had a curve in his spine and thus he was discharged 

3.  The applicant provides his NGB Form 22.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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.  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 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's records show he enlisted in the Kentucky Army National Guard for a service obligation of 8 years on 24 November 1993.  He enlisted under the split option program and for training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 12B (Combat Engineer).

3.  He agreed to serve satisfactorily for a minimum of 6 years in a bonus unit or a bonus MOS in the Selected Reserve.  He was assigned to Company C, 206th Engineer Battalion, 35th Infantry Division, Jackson, KY.  

4.  On 24 November 1993, Louisville Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) published Orders 233-06 ordering him to report to Fort Leonard Wood, MO, for completion of basic training beginning on or about 17 May 1994.  

5.  He entered initial active duty training (ADT) on 17 May 1994.  He completed approximately 9 weeks of basic combat training and returned home for school or seasonal employment around 14 July 1994.  

6.  On 20 April 1995, Louisville MEPS published Orders 078-11 ordering him to report to Fort Leonard Wood, MO, for completion of 7 weeks of MOS training (AIT), beginning on or about 5 June 1995. 

7.  On 7 June 1995, Louisville MEPS published Orders 112-16 rescinding Orders Number 078-11 published on 20 April 1995. 

8.  On 8 June 1995, by letter, the Chief Medical Officer, Louisville MEPS notified the applicant that this letter served as a written notification of his medical disqualification for entry into the Armed Forces of the United States.  His medical disqualification was based upon the finding of having a history of recurrent back pain since 1995.  This was considered disqualifying under medical standards for entrance into military service at the time.

9.  On 22 June 1995, Kentucky Army National Guard (ARNG) published Orders 173-104 ordering his discharge from the ARNG in accordance with National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management), paragraph 8-26(f), effective 22 June 1995 with an uncharacterized discharge.  


10.  He was discharged from the ARNG on 22 June 1995.  His NGB Form 22 shows he was discharged under the provisions of NGR 600-200, paragraph 8-26f by reason of failing to meet medical fitness standards, with an uncharacterized discharge.  

11.  There is no indication he petitioned the State ARNG or the NGB for a review of his discharge within the State's or NGB's regulatory time limitations.   

12.  There is no indication he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for a review of his discharge within that board's statutory limitations. 

13.  NGR 600-200 establishes standards, policies, and procedures for the management of ARNG Soldiers.  Paragraph 8-26f provides for the discharge of ARNG enlisted Soldiers by reason of failing to meet medical fitness standards.  This regulation also provides for the preparation and distribution of the NGB Form 22.  This form is prepared for every Soldier being discharged from the ARNG or released from the custody and control of the military except when a Soldier is accomplishing an interstate transfer or the Soldier dies. 

	a.  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 under 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.  

	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.  A member of a Reserve Component who is not on active duty or who is serving under a call or order to active duty for 180 days or less begins entry-level status upon enlistment in a Reserve Component.  Entry-level status of such a member of a Reserve Component terminates 180 days after beginning training if the Soldier is ordered to ADT for one continuous period of 180 days or 90 days after the beginning of the second period of ADT if the Soldier is ordered to ADT under a program that splits the training into two or more separate periods of active duty.  For the purposes of characterization of service, the Soldier's status is determined by the date of notification as to the initiation of separation proceedings.

14.  Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) provides Department of the Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions regarding an applicant's request for the correction of a military record.  It provides, in pertinent part, that applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR.  The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant enlisted in the ARNG under a split training program.  He entered ADT on 17 May 1994 and completed basic combat training.  He was released from ADT on 14 July 1994. 

2.  He was then ordered to AIT but failed to meet medical fitness standards. As a result, his State ARNG ordered his discharge.  Because he enlisted under a program that splits the training into two or more separate periods of active duty and he was discharged before he even began the second period of ADT, he was still considered in entry-level status.

3.  Because separation action was initiated against him while still in entry-level status, he received an entry-level characterization of service, also known as uncharacterized. 

4.  An uncharacterized discharge is neither positive nor negative; it is not "derogatory."  An uncharacterized character of service is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier’s military service.  It merely means that the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for his/her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise.

5.  The applicant received the appropriate characterization of service and he should not have his NGB Form 22 changed. 

6.  His request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully considered.  However, by regulation, an applicant is not entitled to a hearing before the Board.  In this case, the evidence of record and independent evidence provided by the applicant is sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision at this time.  As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not necessary to serve the interest of equity and justice in this case.



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)                                         AR20140020914





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140020914



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1