Application Receipt Date: 070212

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: NIF
Discharge Received:     Date: 060821
Chapter: 5-11    AR: 635-200
Reason: Failed Medical/Physical/ Procurement Standards
RE:     SPD: JFW
Unit/Location: Company E, 2nd Battalion, 39th Infantry Regiment, Fort
Jackson, SC  29207

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:  850514
Current ENL Date: 060525    Current ENL Term: 4 Years       
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 2 Mos, 27 Days      
Total Service:  0 Yrs, 2 Mos, 27 Days      
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No
MOS: None   GT: 118   EDU: Some College   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: Burnsville, MN  55337-29207
Current Address: 15025 First Avenue S
Burnsville MN 55306
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 3 August 2006, after careful
consideration of medical records, laboratory findings, and medical
examinations, the Physical Evaluation Board (EPSB) 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
conditions(s) existed prior to service.  On 7 August 2006, the medical
approving authority approved the findings of the Physical Evaluation Board
(EPSB).  The applicant was informed of the Physical Evaluation Board
findings.  The applicant concurred with the medical proceedings, and
requested to be discharged from the US Army.  On 10 August 2006,the
applicant consulted waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the
discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The
unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service.  The
intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and
recommended approval of the separation action.  On 14 August 2006, the
separation approving authority directed that the applicant be discharged
with an uncharacterized separation of service.

      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 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, these findings were approved by competent medical
authority.  The applicant agreed with these findings and the proposed
action for administrative separation from the Army.  The analyst 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.  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.  Further, for soldiers 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 that no such unusual
circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and his service did
not warrant an honorable discharge.  Therefore, the reason for discharge
and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable.































VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing:                  Date: 16 April 2007
Location: Chicago, IL

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA

Exhibits Submitted: NA



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. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner

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

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority:

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official:


MARY E. SHAW                      DATE: 8 MAY 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder