Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/11/15	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "I believe my reentry code and reason for separation are in error due to an administrative error.  My separation code is JFW which states that there was an erroneous enlistment.  I was forthcoming with all information upon enlisting with the Army, and disclosed all details to any questions asked.  The separation code also states that there was no medical waiver approved for enlistment.  My enlistment took quite some time due to the need for a medical waiver for surgery that occured in 1992.  There was a waiver approved for my enlistment.  The particulars of my discharge were rather simple and quick.  I went to a Physician's Assistant about a very small amount of leg cramping and pain.  The Physician's Assistant told me I should never have enlisted and I was given papers to sign a few days later to be discharged.  Unfortunately, being young, naive, and a little homesick I did not fight to stay and serve my country. This was a sad and unwise mistake on my part.  I humbly ask that my reentry code be changed due to these circumstances.  Serving my country would be a great honor and I pray I am given that chance."

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	NIF   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 991213   Chapter: 5-11    AR: 635-200
Reason: Failed to Meet Procurement Medical Fitness Standards	   RE:     SPD: JFW   Unit/Location: B Co, 30th AG BN (ITB), Fort Benning, GA  

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 991105    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00  Yrs, 01  Mos, 09  Days ?????
Total Service:  		00  Yrs, 01  Mos, 09  Days includes 8 days of excess leave (991206-991213)
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-1		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 108   EDU: GED   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed




 


VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicant's discharge from the Army are not contained in the available records.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature.  
       
       The DD Form 214, indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-11, AR 635-200, by reason of failed medical/physical procurement standards, with service uncharacterized.  Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JFW (i.e., failed medical/physical procurement standards), with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3." 
       
       On 9 December 1999, DA, HQS, United States Army Infantry Center, Fort Benning, GA, Orders 343-2225, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date:  12 December 1999.  

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       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 entry 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.  Army Regulation 635-200, states that a Soldier is in an entry-level status if the Soldier has not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty prior to the initiation of separation action. 

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s available records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army, however the applicant’s record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  
       
       The DD Form 214, shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-11, AR 635-200, by reason of failed medical/physical procurement standards, with service uncharacterized.  In connection with such a discharge, the proceedings of an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) would have revealed that the applicant had a medical condition that was disqualifying for enlistment and that it existed prior to entry on active duty.  Subsequently, competent medical authority would have had to approve the findings of the EPSBD.  The applicant would have had to agree with the findings and the proposed action for administrative separation from the Army.    
       
       A Soldier is in entry-level status (ELS) for the first 180 days of continuous active duty.  The purpose of the entry-level status is to provide the Soldier a probationary period.  Army Regulation 635-200, also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldier’s service will be uncharacterized when his separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status.  
       
       A fully honorable discharge may be granted only in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty.  The analyst determined no such unusual circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and the applicant's service did not warrant an honorable discharge.
       The applicant requested a change to narrative reason for separation and the reentry eligibility (RE) code.  The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-11, AR 635-200.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Failed/Medical/Physical/Procurement Standards," the separation code is "JFW," and the reentry code is "RE 3."   
       
       Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. 
       
        The applicant contends his reentry code and reason for separation are in error due to an administrative error. There is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his contention.  There is no evidence in the available record, nor has the applicant provided any evidence, to support the contention that his reentry code and reason for separation were an administrative error.
       
        The applicant further contends being young, naive, and a little homesick and did not fight to stay in the Army.  The applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. 
       
       Furthermore, the analyst determined that the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) does not contain all the specific documents that would indicate the reason for the separation action from the United States Army.  If the applicant desires to appear before a personal appearance Board, the burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration.  
       
       The applicant desires to serve his country.  At the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  If the applicant desires to reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his eligibility to reenlist.  Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes.
       
       Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that based on the DD Form 214, the reason for discharge, the characterization of service to include the reentry eligibility (RE) code were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.
       
VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 16 May 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Online application, dated (111111); North Mississippi Medical Center, Medical Documents, six (6) pages; and an Employee Health Examination Record, dated (060207). 







VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  
        
IX.  Board Decision						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: 
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder
?????




















Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20110022525
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 4 of 4 pages