Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2011/12/12 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he went to the doctor at the Ireland Army Hospital and the doctor stated that he wanted the applicant to have an honorable discharge, but his unit commander tore up any recommendation from the doctor, and pushed the uncharacterized discharge to the separation authority without any due process that he could obtain. He is now requesting due process as he feels the medical discharge should have been at least part of his discharge authority. He has enclosed medical records from the Ireland Army Hospital, Ft Knox, Kentucky, in support of his justification. 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: 110322 Discharge Received: Date: 110421 Chapter: 11 AR: 635-200 Reason: Entry Level Performance and Conduct RE: SPD: JGA Unit/Location: HHC, 46th AG Bn (Reception), 194th Armored Brigade, Fort Knox, KY 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: 19 Current ENL Date: 101027 Current ENL Term: 4 Years 17 Weeks Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 05 Mos, 25 Days ????? Total Service: 00 Yrs, 05 Mos, 25 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: 84 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on or about 22 March 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 11, AR 635-200, by reason of entry level performance and conduct for failure to adapt to military life, refusal to participate in training, and for lack of motivation, with an uncharacterized discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 22 March 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with an uncharacterized discharge. On 18 April 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s separation from the Army with an uncharacterized discharge. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 11, of this regulation, in pertinent part, states that a member may be separated for unsatisfactory performance, conduct, or both, while in an entry level status. This provision of the regulation applies to Soldiers who can not meet the minimum standards for training, have demonstrated that they are not qualified for retention because they can not adapt socially or emotionally to military life or because they lack the aptitude, ability, motivation or self discipline for military service, or they have demonstrated characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued military service. For separation under this Chapter the regulation requires an uncharacterized discharge. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue and documents submitted with the application, 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 as entry-level status, 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. Soldiers who are found to lack the necessary motivation, adaptability, self-discipline, ability, or attitude to become productive Soldiers may be expeditiously separated while in entry-level status. Army Regulation 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldier’s service will be uncharacterized when the separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status. A general, under honorable conditions 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 no such unusual circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and the former Soldier’s service did not warrant an honorable discharge. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs. This presumption is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity in this case and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. Accordingly, the analyst 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. Therefore, the analyst determined 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: 25 May 2012 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated 6 December 2011; Medical Documents, dated 6 April 2011 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 Board Vote: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) X. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI. Certification Signature Approval Authority: EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board BONITA E. TROTMAN Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army Secretary Recorder ????? 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 AR20110024482 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages