MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            10 February 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR

	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. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Van B. Cunningham		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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 his discharge be voided and that he be restored to active duty.

APPLICANT STATES:  That when he initially enlisted he didn’t admit that he had been shot in the face at the advice of his recruiter.  While on active duty his cheek bone became infected as a result of shell fragments from that wound.  When he sought military medical care the military physician told him that since he didn’t list his wound on his enlistment physical examination he couldn’t be treated by the military.  The military physician then told him he would have to be discharged and seek civilian medical care for the wound.  He accepted that discharge and received civilian medical care for his wound.  He then reenlisted with a waiver of his medical condition.  While in training he started experiencing severe headaches stemming from his wound and sought pain medication.  He was denied pain medication based on the existing prior to service (EPTS) nature of his wound.  He attests that if he had been given pain medication as he had requested, he would never have been discharged.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army with no prior service on 20 June 1997.  In conjunction with that enlistment he took a physical examination.  In that examination the applicant did not list ever having been shot or having been treated for a gunshot wound.

On 16 December 1997, while still a trainee, the applicant was given an uncharacterized discharge due to his failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards (the details of that discharge are not part of the applicant’s records).

On 28 October 1998 the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army.  On that physical examination he listed his gunshot wound and received a waiver from the appropriate authority.

On 23 October 1998 an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) was convened to consider separating the applicant from the Army.  In the EPSBD record of proceedings it was recorded that the applicant had reported being unable to run or perform military duties because of chronic pain and headache due to his gunshot wound.  It was also recorded that the applicant stated that he did not believe that he could complete training because of his pain.  The EPSBD recommended that the applicant be discharged due to his failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards.  The applicant concurred with the findings and recommendation of the EPSBD and requested that he be “discharged from the Army without delay.”

Accordingly, on 10 December 1998 the applicant again was given an uncharacterized discharge due to his failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards.

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

1.  The applicant’s failure to list his gunshot wound on his initial enlistment physical examination would have been grounds to discharge him due to fraudulent enlistment.  He has not submitted any evidence which would show that his recruiter told him to falsify his physical examination and, even if his recruiter had told him that, he did not have to follow obviously flawed advise.

2.  Be that as it may, the evidence of record does not support the applicant’s contention that he wanted to remain on active duty.  During the EPSBD on his second enlistment he stated that he was physically incapable of completing his military training and he requested immediate discharge.

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

_vbc ____  _jps ____  _klw____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR19990300164	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	1999030164	
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.	108.05	
2.	110.03	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.