Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010539C070208
Original file (20040010539C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        23 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040010539


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mrs. Victoria A. Donaldson        |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:


      |     |Ms. Kathleen A. Newman            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. William D. Powers             |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Marla J. N. Troup             |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests the narrative reason for separation on his DD
Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) be changed.

2.  The applicant states his characterization of service was corrected by
the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB).

3.  The applicant provides original DD Form 214 and the corrected DD Form
214.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Records show the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 February
2001. He completed basic and advanced individual training .

2.  On 28 September 2001, the applicant was separated under the provisions
of paragraph 5-11 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) for
failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards.  His service was
uncharacterized.  The applicant had completed 7 months and 28 days of
active military service.

3.  The facts and circumstances of the applicant's separation are not in
the available records.

4.  On 16 August 2002, the applicant applied to the ADRB for
recharacterization of his service.

5.  The ADRB case report shows the Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB)
found the applicant was medically unfit for enlistment in accordance with
current medical fitness standards.  This report further shows the medical
approving authority approved the findings of the EPSB.

6.  The ADRB determined the applicant had served more than 180 days and,
therefore, he was entitled to a characterization of service in accordance
with applicable regulation.

7.  The ADRB voted unanimously to change the applicant's characterization
of service to show honorable.  The ADRB further determined that the reason
for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.


8.  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 entrance on active duty or
active duty training or initial entry 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 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 of
regulation will normally be honorable, but will be uncharacterized if the
Soldier is in an entry level status.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends the narrative reason for separation on his DD
Form 214 should be changed because his characterization of service was
corrected by the ADRB.

2.  Although, the ADRB granted the applicant's request to have his service
characterized as honorable, the ADRB determined the narrative reason for
separation was proper and equitable and did not authorize a change to his
narrative reason for separation.

3.  Since, the facts and circumstance of the applicant's separation are not
available for consideration, regularity must be presumed in this case.

4.  The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to show he separated
for reasons other than for failure to meet medical fitness standards.
Therefore, in the absence of such evidence, there is no basis to amend the
applicant's DD Form 214 as requested.









BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_KAN_ __  _WDP___  __MT___  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.





                                      ___Kathleen A. Newman____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040010539                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050823                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |2001/09/28                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200 para 5-11 . . .              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Failure to meet Medical Standards       |
|BOARD DECISION          |Deny                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schneider                           |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.0200.0000                           |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130011350

    Original file (AR20130011350.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 31 January 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20130011350 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. The characterization of service for...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130000402

    Original file (AR20130000402.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 1 September 2011, the separation authority directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service listed as uncharacterized. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 5 December 2001, with a characterization of service as uncharacterized. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130012340

    Original file (AR20130012340.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable. The applicant was separated with an uncharacterized discharge. Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130014324

    Original file (AR20130014324.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 October 2008, the separation authority directed the applicant’s discharge with service uncharacterized. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: The record contains one counseling statement dated 19 September 2008, in which the applicant was informed about his condition that existed prior to his entry into active duty and he concurred. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130007889

    Original file (AR20130007889.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 March 2004, for a period of 4 years. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a copy of his basic training and medical records, including the front page of DA Form 4707, dated 26 August 2004; DD Form 214 for service under current review; and his discharge orders. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130007830

    Original file (AR20130007830.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his uncharacterized discharge to honorable and the narrative reason changed. On 17 December 2012, the separation authority directed the applicant’s discharge with service uncharacterized. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130003564

    Original file (AR20130003564.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 26 January 2013, the separation authority directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service listed as uncharacterized. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB) Proceedings dated, 18 January 2013. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130007514

    Original file (AR20130007514.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard on 11 April 2012, for a period of 8 years. 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 active duty training or initial entry training will be separated. Soldiers being processed for separation...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130006049

    Original file (AR20130006049.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 26 February 1999, the separation authority approved the separation action and directed the applicant’s discharge with service uncharacterized. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130001617

    Original file (AR20130001617.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Another profile violation was being taken to the shooting ranges multiple times where he stood guard in towers that caused more pain to his back. Additional documents: applicant’s self-authored statement addressed to the Army disability review board, undated; VA statement in support of claim, dated 14 April 2013; health record, dated 15 November 2011; medical records and doctors’ statement, dated 25 January 2013, 11 February 2013, 6 November 2011, and 4 March 2013, respectively. However,...