PART II - APPLICATION DATA

      (Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy)

1.  Character of Discharge:  Uncharacterized

2.  Date of discharge (or REFRAD):  000418

3.  Authority for separation:

      a.  Regulation:  Chapter 5, Paragraph 5-11, AR 635-200

      b.  Reason:  Failure to Meet Procurement Medical Fitness Standards

4.  Prior review(s):  NONE



                         PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

                 SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

1.    Service data:                              2.  Awards and
    decorations:
                                           NONE
    a.  Period entered for:  8 Years
    b.  Entry date:  000104
    c.  Age:  20 Years   DOB:  790719
    d.  Educational level:  HS Grad
    e.  Aptitude area score:
          GT:  86                                3.  Highest grade
achieved:
    f.  Length of Service:                         E3
          0 Years  3 Months  15 Days

                                               4.  Performance evaluations:

                                                   NONE

                         PART III - SERVICE HISTORY
           SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued

5.  Periods of unauthorized absence:  NONE

    Status       Inclusive dates
      AWOL

      Mil conf

      Civil conf

      Other


6.  Nonjudicial punishment:  NONE

      Date  Offense(s)



7.  Court-Martial data:  NONE

      a.  SCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


      b.  SPCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


      c.  GCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


8.    Remarks:  NONE


                       SECTION B - Prior Service Data

Other discharge(s):

      Service    From  To    Type Discharge
      ARNGUS     990526      000103     NA
        (Concurrent Service)




                         PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

                       SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l.  Facts and Circumstances:

      a.  Evidence of record shows that on 30 March 2000, after careful
consideration of medical records, laboratory findings, and medical
examinations, the Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) determined that
the applicant did not meet medical procurement standards due to left arm
weakness and left wrist pain, existed prior to service (EPTS).  The board
found that the applicant was medically unfit for enlistment in accordance
with current medical fitness standards and in the opinion of the evaluating
physicians the condition existed prior to service.  On 13 April 2000, the
applicant concurred with the EPSBD proceedings and requested discharge from
the Army without delay.  On 13 April 2000, the unit commander recommended
approval of his request.  On 14 April 2000, the intermediate commander
reviewed the separation action.  On 17 April 2000, the separation authority
approved the separation action.

      b.  On 18 April 2000, the applicant was released from active duty for
training, discharged from the Reserve of the Army, and returned to the Army
Nation Guard.  At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 3
months and 15 days of active military service in the period under review
and had a total of 10 months and 23 days of total military service.

      c.  Evidence of record shows that on 30 May 2000, the applicant was
subsequently discharged from the Army National Guard as a result of his
discharge from the Reserve of the Army.

2.  Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action:  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 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.


                      SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS


1.  Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel.
    As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293.

2.  Exhibit(s) submitted:

      A-1:  DD Form 293, dated 040316, with three (3) enclosures.
      A-2:  Counsel Issues:  NONE
      B-l:  Other Documents: NONE
                   PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED)

              SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion


Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor      ( ) Legal Advisor



      a.  Medical prehearing comments (if applicable):


      b.  Legal prehearing comments (if applicable):











                         PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING

                      SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits

1.  Review/hearing information:


      a. Type requested:
         ( X ) Records review             (   ) Hearing

      b. Type Held:
         ( X )Records review              (   ) Hearing
                                          (   ) Tender Offer

      c. Review/hearing location and date:  Washington, DC on 17 November
2004.

      d. Appearance by:
         Applicant                 (   ) Yes   ( X ) No
         Counsel                   (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

      e.  Applicant testified:     (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

      f.  Counsel presentation:    (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

      g.  Witness(es) testified:   (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

2.  Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing:
                        PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS

1.  a.  Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity:

          ( X )  Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A
              of this case report and directive.
          (   )  Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as
              follows:
          (   )  Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as
              follows:

      b.  Request:  ( X ) Recharacterization     (   ) Change of Reason

2.  Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on
issues of propriety and/or equity:

      a.  Propriety:   The parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to
                   the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI,
                   Paragraph 1, above.

        (1)  The issue is rejected.  The evidence of record does not
support the applicant’s contentions and the applicant has provided no
independent corroborating evidence in support of his contentions.  The
Board found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.
The proceedings of the Enlistment Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) 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 approved these findings.  The
applicant agreed with these findings and the proposed action for
administrative separation from the Army.  The separation authority approved
the applicant's discharge as entry-level status (ELS), with the description
of service as uncharacterized.  A soldier is in entry-level status for the
first 180 days of continuous active duty.  The purpose of the entry-level
status is to provide the soldier a probationary period.  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 Board determined that no such unusual
circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and his service did
not warrant an honorable discharge.  The Board was satisfied that all
requirements of law and regulation were met and that the rights of the
applicant were fully protected through the separation process.  The Board,
being convinced that the reason for the discharge and the characterization
of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.

      b.  Equity:      The applicant has not submitted an issue of equity
                   and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an issue of
                   equity to change the discharge.  The major factors upon
                   which the discharge was based are set forth in Parts III
                   and IV of this decisional document.

3.  Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s):  NONE

                           PART VII - BOARD ACTION
                   SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote

1.    Board conclusion(s):

      The discharge was:

      ( X ) Proper.
      (   ) Improper as to characterization.  Change characterization to
                                               .
      (   ) Improper as to reason.  Change reason to
                                   under                      .

      ( X ) Equitable.
      (   ) Inequitable as to characterization.  Change characterization to
                                         .
      (   ) Inequitable as to reason.  Change reason to
                                 
            under                                 .
      (   ) Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for
           separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should
           be changed to                      under
                                   .

2.  Voting record:      Change   No Change
                  Reason       0         5
    Characterization       0         5

        The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in
Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address
below.  The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right
corner of this document.

                  Department of the Army Review Boards Agency
                  ATTN:  Promulgation Team
                  1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor
                  Arlington, VA  22202-4508



3.  Minority views:  NONE
                           PART VII - BOARD ACTION
                 SECTION B - Verification and Authentication

Case report reviewed and verified

                          
MR. RIVERA
Case Reviewing Official

                     PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
                            SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

                                    NONE

                          SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


ROBERT L. HOUSE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
   Review Board

Official:




MARY E. SHAW
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder

EXHIBITS:
A - Application for review of discharge                  C - Other
B - Material submitted by applicant

INDEX RECORD:

AR Number:  2004106156                    INDEX NUMBERS:  A0113
Date of Review:  041117                                   A9411
Character of Service:  EL
Date of Discharge:  000418
Authority:  AR 635-200 C5
Reason:  A2800
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation:  NC 5-0 A













                           PART IX - VOTING RECORD

    Name                                   Reason          Characterization
                                           CHANGE   NC     HON  UHC   NC
UNCHAR

    1.      Mbr          X                 X       

    2.      Mbr          X                 X       

    3.      Mbr          X                 X       

    4.      Mbr          X                 X       

    5.      PO           X                 X