Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2011/02/15 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, she received an honorable discharge from the medical board. The uncharacterized discharge is an error. The Army allowed her to enlist even though they knew she had a medical condition and was on medication which made her drowsy and sleepy. Although, she told the drill sergeant she was on medication she was still forced to pull fire guard in the night and her medical condition was ignored. She did not take her medication because she was on duty and as a result she had to go to the hospital because her allergy worsened. She had a profile that stated she had to be in the shade and was still forced to be weapons guard and perform other activities in the heat and sun. Her chain of command did not provide any help or understanding. The drill sergeant and platoon sergeant were always making fun of her medical condition, giving her a hard time which added more stress that worsened her condition. They also made fun of her for being born in Romania and gave her a hard time about her accent. She thought that in the Army everyone was Army green. Her drill sergeant also called her shady because she has a bachelor’s degree in Law and in her drill sergeant’s opinion all lawyers are shady. Because of her medical condition, the doctor decided to give her a chapter 2-28 discharge which they told her is an honorable medical discharge. After receiving the paper work from the doctor the company executive officer came to her while she was with her platoon in the field and rushed her to sign the documents. She was pressured to sign the paper work and did not get any type of counseling regarding any of the consequences. The next day the executive office started to shout at her when she refused to sign the paper work the drill sergeant, executive officer, and others started to shout at her pressuring her to sign the documents without letting her read them. They were calling her names and put the pen in her hand so she would sign her chapter out of the Army without knowing what it was, without reading it or knowing the consequences. She told the TMC doctor what her chain of command did to her and the doctor told her to go to the JAG. She tried to talk to the battalion commander; however, her drill sergeant and the executive officer made sure it did no good to talk to the commander. 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 100826 Chapter: 5-11 AR: 635-200 Reason: Failed Medical/Physical/Procurement Standards RE: SPD: JFW Unit/Location: F Company, 1-61st Infantry Regiment, 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: 34 Current ENL Date: 100622 Current ENL Term: 3 Years 21 Weeks Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 2 Mos, 5 Days ????? Total Service: 0 Yrs, 2 Mos, 5 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: NIF EDU: College Degree Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Chula Vista, CA Post Service Accomplishments: None VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 18 August 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of involuntary separation action under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-11, AR 635-200, by reason of failure to meet procurement medical fitness standards with an uncharacterized discharge. An Entrance Physical Standards Board convened on 11 August 2010 and determined the applicant’s medical condition of total body urticaria dated back to prior to entry into the Army. The applicant reviewed and concurred with the findings of the Entrance Physical Standard Board (EPSB) proceedings, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Service. On 19 August 2010, the separation authority directed the applicant’s discharge with service as uncharacterized. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the 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 or active duty 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 that 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. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable. However for Soldiers in entry-level status, it will be uncharacterized. Army Regulation 635-200 states that a Soldier is in an entry-level status if the Soldier has not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty prior to the initiation of separation action. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of the applicant’s military records the issue and documents she submitted, to include his supporting documents, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The proceedings of an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD), dated 11 August 2008 shows the applicant was diagnosed with total body urticara and recommended for separation from the Army for failure to meet medical procurement standards in accordance with AR 40-501, chapter 2-28. Subsequently, competent medical authority approved the findings of the EPSBD. The applicant agreed with these findings and the proposed action for administrative separation from the Army. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected through the separation process. A Soldier is in entry-level status (ELS) 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 general, under honorable conditions discharge is not authorized under ELS conditions and 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. The analyst noted the applicant's issues; however, found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 23 September 2011 Location: Washington, D. C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 with a self-authored statement, medical documents, congressional correspondence and a DD Form 214. 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: NA Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20110003308 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages