MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF

	BOARD DATE:            17 July 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2003083806

	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	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell 		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:  In effect, that her records be changed to show that she was medically qualified for retention in the Army.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, she was examined by her doctor, who is 
a hematologist, and the completed lab work revealed that she no longer 
possesses a vitamin B12 deficiency.  She states that her medical records from Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, indicate that she can reenlist when she is found fit for service.

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

On 19 November 1996, she enlisted in the Army for 4 years, for training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 62E (Heavy Construction Equipment Operator), and airborne training.

The applicant was assigned to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, to attend basic combat training (BCT).  A medical examination she took while in BCT revealed that she was suffering from anemia, and that this condition existed prior to service (EPTS).  As a result, she was referred to an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSB) for evaluation.  

On 6 December 1996, the EPSB met and determined that the applicant’s medical condition did not meet induction standards and it recommended that she be discharged from the Army for failing to meet procurement medical fitness standards.  The applicant was informed of the EPSB findings and recommendations, and she was advised of her options in connection with the completed EPSB action.  

On 12 December 1996, the applicant concurred with the EPSB findings and recommendations, and she requested to be discharged from the Army without delay.  The EPSB findings were approved by the appropriate authority and on 
20 December 1996, the applicant received an uncharacterized discharge under the provisions of paragraph 5-11, Army Regulation 635-200, for failing to meet procurement medical fitness standards.  At the time of her separation, she had completed a total of 1 month and 2 days of active military service.

The applicant’s DD Form 214 confirms that the authority for her discharge was paragraph 5-11, Army Regulation 635-200, and that the narrative reason for her separation was failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards.  The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to her upon separation shows that she was assigned a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JFW and a reentry (RE) code of RE-3. 

Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment processing into the Regular Army and the USAR.  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribed basic eligibility for prior service personnel.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes.  RE-3 applies to persons who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at the time of separation but, the disqualification is waivable.  

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.  

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 that she no longer suffers from the medical condition that resulted in her discharge.  However, this factor even if true does not impact the validity of her discharge, which was based on her medical condition at the time.  

2.  The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was diagnosed as having anemia and as a result was evaluated by an EPSB.  The EPSB found that her condition existed prior to her entry into the service, and it recommended that she be discharged because she did not meet medical fitness standards for enlistment or induction.  The Board further notes that the applicant concurred with the findings and recommendations of the EPSB, and she elected to be discharged without delay.  

3.  The Board finds the applicant’s separation was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize her rights.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for that separation were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

4.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that she no longer suffers from vitamin B12 deficiency and is now fit for military service.  However, even if true this does provide evidentiary support for changing the reason for her discharge, which was valid at the time.  The applicant is advised that the RE-3 code she was assigned at the time of her separation may be waived for enlistment purposes.  If the applicant still desires to enlist in the Navy, it is recommended that she contact a Navy recruiter and request that they process a waiver for her enlistment in their service if she is otherwise qualified. 

5.  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. 

6.  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

RKS__  __JM___  __JHL    _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003083806	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED		
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UNCHAR	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19961220	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200 .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	Failure to Meet Procurement Medical Fitness Standards	
BOARD DECISION	 DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 191	 110.0200	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.