Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/09/04 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 051119 Discharge Received: Date: 051214 Chapter: 6-3a AR: 635-200 Reason: Hardship RE: SPD: KDB Unit/Location: E Co, 1-61 IN Regt, Fort Jackson, SC Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 21 Current ENL Date: 050919 Current ENL Term: 4 Years 21 Weeks Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 02Mos, 26Days ????? Total Service: 00 Yrs, 02Mos, 26Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: NIF EDU: GED Cert Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Orange, NJ Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 18 November 2005, the applicant requested discharge under the provisions of Chapter 6, Paragraph 6-3a, AR 635-200, by reason of hardship/dependency of family member. The unit commander recommended approval of the applicant's request for discharge. On 19 November 2005, the unit commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an uncharacterized separation of service. On 2 December 2005, the intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an uncharacterized separation of service. On 7 December 2005, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of uncharacterized. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 6-3a provides for the separation of Soldiers because of genuine dependency. Genuine dependency, for the purpose of separation under this paragraph, is defined as when death or disability of a member of a Soldier's (or spouse's) immediate family causes that member to rely upon the Soldier for principal care or support. The regulation requires an uncharacterized separation of service when his separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review and the issue she submitted, the analyst noted from the evidence of record that the applicant received an uncharacterized separation while in an entry-level status (ELS). The separation authority approved the applicant's discharge by reason of hardship/dependency of a family member, with the description of service as uncharacterized. Army Regulation 635-200, provides in pertinent part, that a Soldier is in entry-level status for the first 180 days of continuous active duty. The purpose of the entry-level status is to provide the Soldier a probationary period. Army Regulation 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldier’s service will be uncharacterized when his separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status. A fully honorable discharge is not authorized under ELS conditions. A fully honorable discharge may be granted only in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty. The analyst determined that no such unusual circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and his service did not warrant an honorable discharge. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 10 June 2009 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080013729 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 2 pages