MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            12 April 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000049376

	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. Deyon D. Battle		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Roger W. Able		Chairperson	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman		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 uncharacterized discharge be changed to a medical discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he injured his back while he was in basic training.  He states that he was treated by doctors and spent his last week on active duty in physical therapy.  He goes on to state that his commander knew about his back injury and decided not to process him through medical channels because of the amount of paperwork involved.  He states that he received counseling for depression while he was in the Army because as a result of his injury, he did a lot of standing around.  He concludes by stating that he is having problems getting accepted for employment because he is still having problems with his back.

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

On 14 July 2000, the applicant underwent a medical examination and he was found to be qualified for enlistment in the Army.  On 1 August 2000, he enlisted in the Army for 4 years at Fort Benning, Georgia, in the pay grade of E-1.

On 12 August 2000, he was counseled for failing his diagnostic Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT).  His Developmental Counseling Form indicates that the applicant failed to meet fifty percent in three events.  He was told that if he continued his substandard performance, he would give the chain of command no other choice except to consider him for corrective training or separation from the Army under the entry level status (ELS) program.

On 18 August 2000, after complaining of back pain, the applicant went to sick call and was placed on a temporary physical profile.  He was counseled regarding the training that he missed and he was informed that his drill sergeant and chain of command understood his inability to participate due to his physical profile limitations.  He was also informed that missed training as a result of sick call or a physical profile may result in administrative action such as a restart, not graduating or separation under the ELS program.

The applicant was counseled on 23 August 2000 regarding the result of a mental status evaluation that he underwent.  The attending physician recommended that he be expeditiously administratively separated based on his failure to adapt.  The physician cleared him for whatever administrative action deemed appropriate by his command.

On 25 August 2000, the applicant was notified regarding his unsatisfactory performance and for misconduct.  His individual training record indicates that he showed signs of severe depression; he had an anger problem and tended to lash out at authority figures; he felt he was not suited for the Army; was not willing to have any motivation while training; he had been counseled several times for not shaving; and he would not work well with others in the squad.  He failed his diagnostic (APFT) and his overall rating was unsatisfactory.

On 28 August 2000 the applicant was notified that he was being recommended for separation from the Army based on his inability to adapt socially or emotionally to military life.  On 29 August 2000, he acknowledged receipt of the notification and he waived his right to be represented by counsel before a board of officers and to submit a statement in his own behalf. 

The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge.  Accordingly, on 13 September 2000, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11 based on his entry level performance and conduct.  He had completed 1 month and 13 days of total active service.  His character of service was uncharacterized.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 11 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members because of unsatisfactory performance or conduct (or both) while in an entry level status.  It states, in pertinent part, that separation under this chapter applies to soldiers who are in entry level status and before the date of the initiation of separation action, have completed no more than 180 days of continuous active duty and have demonstrated that they cannot or will not adapt socially or emotionally to military life.  Entry level status is defined as the first 180 days of continuous active duty.  It further states that the character of service for members separated under the provisions of this chapter will be uncharacterized.

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 applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  Although the applicant was seen by physicians and placed on a physical profile for a back injury while he was in the Army, there is no evidence of record that shows that his injury was severe enough to process him through medical channels.  The evidence of record clearly shows that he was being counseled for failing APFT prior to being seen regarding back problems.  He was properly discharged under the ELS program because of his inability to adapt socially or emotionally to military life and because he had completed less than 180 days of total active service. 
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

____ra __  ___rtd___  ___dh___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000049376	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/04/12	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UNCHAR	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	20000913	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	516	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  516	144.2900.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.