MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  19 April 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2001054158

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That her uncharacterized discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That her discharge is uncharacterized.  In support of her application she submits a copy of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), a copy of her Standard Form 93 (Report of Medical History), dated 25 February 2000, and a copy of her DA Form 4797 (Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD)) Proceedings, dated 26 July 2000.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant provided a copy of her Standard Form 93, dated 26 February 2000, which was prepared prior to her entrance on active duty, which shows that she indicated that she had recurrent back pain.

She enlisted on 20 March 2000 as a personnel service specialist.

The applicant provided a copy of her EPSBD Proceedings which shows that she was diagnosed as having chronic back pain.  The EPSBD indicated that the applicant did not meet medical fitness standards for enlistment or induction under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 2, paragraph 2-36b.  The EPSBD also indicated that the applicant’s condition existed prior to service (EPTS), was not service aggravated, and that she did not meet retention standards under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3.  It was recommended that she meet a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) for consideration of separation.  The applicant’s waiver of the MEB is not in the available records.

Her DD Form 214 shows that on 11 August 2000, she was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, for failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards.  She was furnished an Uncharacterized Discharge Certificate.  She had a total of 4 months and 22 days of creditable service.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for 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, active duty for 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 the 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 will normally be honorable, but will be uncharacterized if the soldier has not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty prior to the initiation of separation action.

Army Regulation 40-501 governs medical fitness standards for induction, enlistment, appointment, retention, separation, retirement, officer procurement programs and related policies and procedures.  Paragraph 2-36b pertains to complaint of a disease or injury of the spine or sacroiliac joints with or without objective signs that has prevented the individual from successfully following a physically active vocation in civilian life. Substantiation or documentation of the complaint without objective physical findings is required. 

Army Regulation 40-501, at chapter 3, provides standards for medical retention.  Basically, members with conditions as severe as listed in this chapter are considered medically unfit for retention on active duty.

Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 5, provides, in pertinent part, that if a soldier is processed for failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards within the first six months of entry on active duty and the condition existed prior to the term of service, then the soldier will be discharged in an entry level status with uncharacterized service.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of her discharge on 28 December 2000.  The ADRB determined that her
discharge was proper and equitable and denied her request on 9 March 2001.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations it is concluded:

1.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention; however, she was diagnosed as having chronic back pain and appeared before an EPSBD which indicated that she did not meet medical fitness standards for enlistment or induction.  The Board also notes that the EPSBD indicated that the applicant’s condition existed prior to service, was not service aggravated, and that she did not meet retention standards under the provision of Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3.  Although the applicant’s waiver of the MEB is not in the available records, the basis for her uncharacterized separation would have remained unchanged.

2.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations, with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize her rights.

3.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for that separation were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___js___  ___be__  ___cg___  DENY APPLICATION

						Carl W. S. Chun
				       Director, Army Board for Correction
                                                               of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001054158	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010419	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	20000811	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200  5-11	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  191		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.