IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  5 July 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110000316 


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 of 3 so that he is eligible to reenter the armed forces.

2.  The applicant states he was separated for flat feet and hammertoe.  He contends that this is not the case today.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a statement from a Doctor of Podiatric Medicine (DPM), undated.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  A DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination), dated 21 November 2007, indicates that the applicant had a moderate hammertoe condition of the left foot.  There was no indication of his having flat feet.  He was found to be medically qualified for military service.

2.  On 11 June 2008, the applicant was ordered to initial active duty for training (IADT) as a U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Soldier.  He was subsequently assigned to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri to commence training.

3.  A DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile), dated 9 July 2008, issued the applicant a temporary profile requiring him to wear soft shoes.  He was not to perform any aerobic conditioning activities other than walking at his own pace.  He was authorized to perform upper and lower body weight training.
4.  A DA Form 4707-E (Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD)), initiated on 9 July 2008, indicates that the applicant underwent an EPSBD for determination of his medical fitness for military service.

	a.  The applicant, who was 18 years of age and in his third week of basic training, complained of increasing pain to bilateral fifth toes and metatarsal heads.  He denied falling or joint injuries while at Fort Leonard Wood, but described continuing and increasing pain to both of his fifth toes.  He had been wearing wider boots.  He stated that he was sedentary before coming into the military and had never run 2 miles before.  He was not able to run, jump, march, or tolerate boots.  He tried Motrin but it did not help.  He desired an EPSBD.

	b.  The EPSBD recommended that the applicant be separated from the military for not meeting entrance medical standards in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501 for deformities of the toes that are congenital and prevent wearing military footwear and impaired his running capabilities.

	c.  The EPSBD findings were approved on 15 July 2008.

	d.  The applicant indicated that he had been informed of the medical findings and had understood that legal advice of an attorney employed by the U.S. Army was available to him, or that he could consult civilian counsel at his own expense.  He also indicated that he understood that he could request to be discharged without delay or to request retention on active duty; however, such a request may result in his involuntary reclassification into another military occupational specialty.

	e.  The applicant concurred with the EPSBD proceedings and requested to be discharged without delay.

	f.  The applicant's commander recommended that he be discharged.

	g.  On 31 July 2008, the appropriate authority approved and directed that the applicant be accordingly discharged.

5.  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 5 August 2008 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 of 3.



6.  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.  

7.  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.

8.  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.

9.  In an undated Visit Note, the applicant's DPM indicates that on 15 March 2010, the applicant presented himself with a complaint of hammertoes and flat feet.  He needed medical clearance for the purpose of joining the military.

	a.  The applicant reported having no pain or problems.

	b.  No injury was noted.



	c.  The applicant stated he had gone through basic training and then was discharged when the drill sergeant saw that he had hammertoes.

	d.  The applicant's feet were examined by x-ray revealing no fracture or degeneration.  He had a severe hammertoe deformity of bilateral fifth digit.

	e.  The DPM concluded that the applicant was fully able to perform military jobs and that his condition does not give him limitations.  He had no pain at the time of the examination.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was given a temporary physical profile that limited his physical capabilities.  He subsequently was evaluated by an EPSBD; after which, he concurred and requested to be discharged without delay.

2.  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.

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

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

5.  The applicant's recent medical evaluation and determination by his DPM indicating a belief he is now able to perform military duties is not a valid basis for removal or arbitrary waiver of the applicant’s disqualification 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.

6.  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)                                         AR20110000316





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110000316



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1