Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 070816
Prior Review Prior Review Date: None
I. Applicant Request
Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant.
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: 040804
Discharge Received: Date: 040809
Chapter: 5-11 AR: 635-200
Reason: Failed Medical/Physical Procurement Standards
RE: SPD: JFW
Unit/Location: Company A, 1-48th Infantry, 3rd Training Brigade, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473-8929
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Year/Month: 8007
HOR City, State: ?????
Current ENL Date: 040428 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 3 Mos, 12 Days ?????
Total Service: 0 Yrs, 3 Mos, 12 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: None GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None
V. Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 25 June 2004, 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) (i.e., Asthma, exercise induced) existed prior to service. On 15 July 2004, the medical approving authority approved the findings of the Physical Evaluation Board (EPSB). On 4 August 2004, the applicant was informed of the Physical Evaluation Board findings and advised of his rights. The applicant stated that he understood that legal advice of an attorney employed by the Army was available to him or that he may consult civilian counsel at his own expense. The applicant concurred with the medical proceedings, and requested to be discharged from the US Army. On 4 August 2004, the unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service. On 4 August 2004, the separation 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 soldiers 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 applicants military records, documents and the issue he submitted, 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 soldiers service will be uncharacterized when his separation is initiated while the soldier is in entry level status. A general discharge is not authorized under ELS conditions. 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 applicants record and his service did not warrant an honorable discharge. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends that the Board deny relief.
VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing
Type of Hearing: Date: 12 August 2008
Location: Washington, DC
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 0 No change 5 - Character
Change 0 No change 5 - Reason
(Board member names available upon request)
IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.
X. Board Action Directed
No Change
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA
XI. Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority:
MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board
Official:
CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 22 August 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20070011389
______________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 5 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060009221
Application Receipt Date: 060627 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070018460
Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 2007/12/04 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 29 October 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of involuntary separation action under the provisions of Chapter 5-11, AR 635-200, by reason of failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards with an uncharacterized discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 states that a soldier is in an entry-level status if the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007523
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 21 August 2008, after careful consideration of medical records, laboratory findings, and medical examinations, the Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB) found that the applicant was medically unfit for enlistment in accordance with current medical fitness standards, he was diagnosed with a pre existing left foot hallux. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080020022
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 27 August 1996, after careful consideration of medical records, laboratory findings, and medical examinations, the Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB) found that the applicant was medically unfit for enlistment in accordance with current medical fitness standards. On 17 September 1996, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with an uncharacterized separation of service. A fully honorable...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070003642aC071031
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 5 November 1997, 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. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090001852
Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2009/01/05 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 29 August 2008, after careful consideration of medical records, laboratory findings, and medical examinations, the Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB) found that the applicant was medically unfit for enlistment in accordance with current medical fitness standards, he was diagnosed with a left knee meniscal tear, chronic, and in...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011277
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 22 November 1995, after careful consideration of medical records, laboratory findings, and medical examinations, the Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB) found that the applicant was medically unfit for enlistment in accordance with current medical fitness standards, he was diagnosed with asthma and in the opinion of the evaluating physicians the condition existed prior to service. Board Action Directed...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090009108
Applicant Name: ????? On 4 February 2009, the intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an uncharacterized discharge. 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.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070002270aC071031
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. Army Regulation 635-200, provides that a soldier is in an entry-level status if...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009929
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 28 January 1998, 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. Army Regulation 635-200 provides that a soldier is in an...