Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100017072
Original file (AR20100017072.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/06/16	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states: "Doctor's note stated I'm fit for military service; I have been off medication for more than 2 years; and that I can enlist in the military and be sucessful." 

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: 	   Date: 091130
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 091207   Chapter: 5-11       AR: 635-200
Reason: Failed Medical/Physical/Procurement Standards	   RE:     SPD: JFW   Unit/Location: E Co, 795th MP Bn, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 

Time Lost: None

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

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 091001    Current ENL Term: 05 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 02Mos, 07Days ?????
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 02Mos, 07Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 102   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Lansing, KS
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 November 2009, 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, in that he was diagnosed as having a bipolar disorder, and in the opinion of the evaluating physicians the condition existed prior to service.  
       
       On 5 November 2009, the medical approving authority approved the findings of the Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB).  The applicant was informed of the Entrance Physical Standards Board findings.  On          30 November 2009, the applicant concurred with the medical proceedings, and requested to be discharged from the U.S. Army.
       On 30 November 2009, the unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service.
       
       On 1 December 2009, the separation authority directed that the applicant be separated with an uncharacterized discharge.

       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 the regulation will normally be honorable.  However for Soldiers in entry-level status, it will be uncharacterized.  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 military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues, and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The proceedings of the Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) revealed that the applicant had a medical condition which 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 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.  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.  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.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue of wanting to rejoin the military, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact the local recruiter to determine 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 if appropriate.  
       
       In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service 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: 11 March 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, doctor's memo, discharge orders, dated, 4 December 2009, and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review.

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						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

















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 AR20100017072
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090002383

    Original file (AR20090002383.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2009/02/10 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090002383 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 3 pages

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011762

    Original file (AR20080011762.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 2008/07/21 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070015232

    Original file (AR20070015232.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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. The analyst recommends to the Board that the reason for discharge and the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090001852

    Original file (AR20090001852.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | AR20080011499

    Original file (AR20080011499.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The analyst determined that no such unusual circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and her service did not warrant an honorable discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090003985

    Original file (AR20090003985.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 18 July 2007, 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 kyphosis (acquired) and in the opinion of the evaluating physicians the condition existed prior to service. In view of the foregoing, the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100016681

    Original file (AR20100016681.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable. Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, DD Form 149, NGB Form 22, and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009956

    Original file (AR20070009956.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015829

    Original file (AR20060015829.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant's...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070018892

    Original file (AR20070018892.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The analyst determined that no such unusual circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and her service did not warrant an honorable discharge. 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.