MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:

	BOARD DATE:           09 AUGUST 2001                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001056926

	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. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Member	
	Ms. Gail J. Wire		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 his 1986 separation from active duty be corrected to reflect that he was honorably discharged.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that it was not his fault that he could not meet the “physical standards of the U.S. Army” and believes that he is “entitled to an honorable discharge.”  Although he provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he submits no additional evidence in support of his request.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were not available to the Board.  Information contained herein was reconstructed from his DD Form 214.

The applicant was a member of the North Dakota Army National Guard when he was ordered to active duty on 14 February 1986 for the purpose of undergoing training.  Less than 2 months later, on 1 April 1986, he was released from active duty for failing to meet procurement medical fitness standards.  His brief military service was “uncharacterized.”

Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph B-10, provides that hereditary, congenital, and other EPTS (existed prior to service) conditions frequently become unfitting through natural progression and should not be assigned a disability rating unless service aggravated complications are clearly documented or unless a soldier has been permitted to continue on active duty after such a condition, known to be progressive, was diagnosed or should have been diagnosed.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11, provides for the administrative separation of soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards when accepted for enlistment providing that the medical condition is identified by appropriate military medical authorities within 6 months of the soldier’s initial entrance on active duty with the Regular Army.  The service of soldiers separated under the preceding provisions is “uncharacterized” for those who are in an entry-level status (within first 180 days of continuous active duty).

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.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary the Board presumes that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  His “uncharacterized” discharge was appropriate in view of the fact that he had less than 180 days of continuous active duty.

2.  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.

3.  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

__INW __  __FNE __  __GJW__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001056926	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010809	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.