IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  16 June 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100028245 


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 his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to change his reentry (RE) code 3.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his RE code 3 is based on false information.

	a.  He contends that he was not shown the first page of the DD Form 4707-E, but was only told if he checked the first block in Item 21 he would be discharged right away and if he checked the second block he would be in basic training longer.  The other two blocks were not explained.  He signed the form but was not provided any copies.

	b.  He contends that the psychiatric history presented on the DA Form 4707-E is entirely untrue.  He was never on any medication nor seen by mental health as either an inpatient or outpatient.  He never attempted suicide.  He never received outpatient treatment at the Wil-Lou-Gray Opportunity School.  He had only requested and obtained anger management treatment so he could be a better leader.

	c.  He wants to fulfill his oath and continue to serve in the U.S. Army.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214; DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination) dated 1 July 2009; DD Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History), dated 1 July 2009; DA Form 4707-E (Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD)), dated 20 January 2010; and four letters of support, dated in July and August 2010.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  On 5 January 2010, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army and was subsequently enrolled in the Basic Combat Training Course at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.

2.  A DA Form 4707-E, initiated on 20 January 2010, indicates that the applicant underwent an EPSBD for determination of his medical fitness for military service.

	a.  The applicant was referred to the Behavioral Health Division because he had attempted to commit suicide by choking himself with his pistol belt while at the consolidated Troop Medical Clinic.

	b.  The applicant had reported problems with depressed mood, poor concentration, poor appetite, inability to sleep, indecisiveness, and suicidal ideation.

	c.  The applicant had symptoms of depression since he was 16 years of age.  He reported four prior suicide attempts including twice when he was 16 years of age, and more recently, in 2009, when he tried to cut his throat.

	d.  The applicant denied any inpatient admissions, but received outpatient treatment twice a week for 5 months at the Wil-Low-Gray Opportunity School in Columbia, South Carolina.

	e.  The applicant denied taking any medications even though he was offered antidepressants.

	f.  The applicant underwent a mental status examination that showed him to be alert and oriented as to place and time.  His mood was anxious, thought was logical, with no evidence of being suicidal or homicidal at the time of his interview.  His insight, impulse control, and judgment were deemed intact.

	g.  The assessment was that if the applicant's suicidal behavior prior to entering the Army had been detected, it would have prevented his enlistment.

	h.  The recommendation was administrative separation.  He was competent to participate in board proceedings and to handle his own financial affairs.


3.  The applicant was counseled:

	a.  on 14 January 2010 by his platoon sergeant who recommended his discharge based on his preexisting condition;

	b.  on 21 January 2010 by his first sergeant who recommended his discharge based on his preexisting condition;

	c.  on 5 February 2010 by his company commander who recommended his discharge based on his preexisting condition; and

	d.  the applicant indicated at each counseling session his concurrence with being discharged due to a preexisting condition.

4.  On 5 February 2010, the applicant indicated, by his signature on the DA Form 4707-E, that he concurred with the findings and recommendation of the EPSBD and requested to be discharged without delay.

5.  On 5 February 2010, the applicant's commander recommended the applicant be discharged.  On 10 February 2010, the separation authority approved the recommendation.

6.  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 22 February 2010 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 5-11, due to failure to meet medical/physical procurement standards.  His service was uncharacterized.  He was given a separation program designator (SPD) code of JFW, and an RE code 3.

7.  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.

8.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) prescribes eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the Army Reserve.  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment and includes a list of armed forces RE Codes including RA RE codes.  RE 3 applies to persons separated from their last period of service with a waivable disqualification.  That regulation further provides that RE codes may only be changed if they are determined to be administratively incorrect.

9.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities and reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  The SPD code of JFW was the appropriate code for the applicant based upon the guidance provided in Army Regulation 635-5-1 for Soldiers separating under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11for failure of Medical/Physical Procurement Standards.  Additionally, the SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table establishes RE code 3 as the proper RE code to assign to Soldiers separated for this reason.
  
10.  The applicant has provided the following letters of support:

	a.  A letter from the Health Director of Wil-Lou-Gray Opportunity School, dated 16 July 2010 essentially states that during the applicant's stay at the school, he had not been referred out for mental health counseling nor did he take behavioral medications.  He did have some anger issues but with staff guidance he completed the program.

	b.  A letter from a medical doctor with the Medical University of South Carolina, dated 27 July 2010, states that the applicant had been presented to his clinic for assessment.  An evaluation was performed that provided no diagnoses for Axis I or II; a history of ACL [anterior cruciate ligament] injury status/post repair for Axis III; minimal for Axis IV; and a global assessment of functioning 90 for Axis V.

	c.  A letter from the Supervisor of Child and Adolescent Services, The Waccamaw Center for Mental Health, dated 13 August 2010, states the applicant has never been a client of the Waccamaw Center for Mental Health, nor is there any evidence that he has been a client of any mental health agency in the state of South Carolina.

	d.  A letter from an attorney at law, located in Georgetown, South Carolina, dated 19 August 2010, states he has reviewed the three letters described above, as well as the applicant's medical records from Georgetown Internal Medicine and Pediatrics.  Based on this review, the attorney concludes the applicant is physically and mentally fit to serve in the U.S. Army.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to change his reentry (RE) code 3, because it is based on false information.

2.  The evidence of record indicates that the applicant attempted to commit suicide while on active duty and was subsequently referred to an EPSBD.  The applicant was counseled by his platoon sergeant, first sergeant, and company commander regarding his condition.  He indicated his concurrence with each counseling session and subsequently requested to be discharged without delay.

3.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

4.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

5.  The RE code 3, establishing his enlistment/reenlistment ineligibility without waiver, was correctly entered on his separation document in accordance with governing regulations.

6.  There is no apparent basis for removal or arbitrary waiver of the applicant’s disqualification by the Board that established the basis for the RE code 3.  The applicant’s desire to continue in the service to his country is noted; however, there are no provisions authorizing the change of an RE code for this purpose.

7.  The discrepancies between the comments written on the EPSBD and the letters provided by the applicant are noted.  However, these differences are inconclusive and insufficient to warrant any modification of the applicant's discharge status or RE code.

8.  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 he desires to reenter military service, he should contact a local recruiter who can best advise him on his 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 must process enlistment waivers for the applicant’s RE code.

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)                                         AR20100028245





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100028245



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1