Application Receipt Date: 051228

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change

Issues: See DD Form 293, with attachments

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?
Yes    No        Tender Offer:        

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits

III.  Original Character of Discharge
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge:    Date: 050725
Discharge Received:     Date: 050802
Chapter: 5-11    AR: 635-200
Reason: Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards
RE:     SPD: JFW
Unit/Location:

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  811225
Current ENL Date: 050322    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  and 18 weeks.
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 4 Mos, 11 Days      
Total Service:  0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 18 Days      
Previous Discharges: USN - 001106-001212 UNC
Highest Grade: E1
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No
MOS: None   GT: 119   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record:
Current Address:
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 19 July 2005, after careful
consideration of medical records, laboratory findings and medical
examinations, the Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) 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(s) existed prior to service.  On 19 July 2005, the medical
approving authority approved the findings of the Board.  On 22 July 2005,
the applicant was informed of the medical findings.  Additionally, he
understood that legal advice of an attorney, employed by the Army, was
available to him, or that he may consult with civilian counsel at her own
expense.  On 22 July 2005, the applicant concurred with these proceedings
and requested to be retained in the US Army.  The unit commander
recommended the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Chapter 5-
11, AR 635-200, by reason of failure to meet procurement medical fitness
standards, with an uncharacterized discharge.   On 29 July 2005, the
separation authority approved separation with an uncharacterized discharge.
 On 2 August 2005, the applicant was discharged.

      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, provides
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 military records, and
the issue he submitted, to include his supporting documents, the analyst
found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's
discharge.  The analyst noted from the evidence of record that the
applicant received an uncharacterized separation while in an entry-level
status (ELS).  The separation authority approved the applicant's discharge
as entry-level status, 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.  Soldiers who are found to lack the
necessary motivation, adaptability, self-discipline, ability, or attitude
to become productive soldiers may be expeditiously separated while in entry-
level status.   The analyst determined that the narrative reason for
discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and
equitable.























































VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing:                  Date: 27 September 2006
Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A

Exhibits Submitted: N/A



VIII.  Board Decision
The discharge was:                Proper           Improper
                                             Equitable        Inequitable

The characterization of service was:   Proper            Improper
                                             Equitable        Inequitable

The narrative reasons were:             Equitable        Inequitable

DRB voting record:                      Change     No change    (Character)
                                        Change     No change    (Reason)
                                   (Board member names available upon
request)

IX.  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 not to change it.
























Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. John Zangas, Examiner

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

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority:

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

Official:


ESMERALDA G. PROCTOR         DATE: 29 September 2006
Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder