Application Receipt Date: 060117 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 040728 Chapter: 4, Paragraph 24B(3) AR: 635-40 Reason: Disability, Severance Pay RE: SPD: JFL Unit/Location: Headquarters 46th AG HLD DET, Fort Knox, KY Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 831017 Current ENL Date: 040218 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 05Mos, 11Days ????? Total Service: 00 Yrs, 05Mos, 11Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: 88 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to a discharge from the Army. However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214, (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature. That DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-40, paragraph 24B (3) by reason of disability, severance pay, with an uncharacterized separation of service. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JFL (i.e., disability, severance pay). On 26 July 2004, Department of Army, Headquarters U. S. Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, Fort Knox, KY 40121-5000, issued Orders 208-0200, which discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date: 28 July 2004. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation for physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of a physical disability. Chapter 4 provides for the separation of enlisted Soldiers found to be unfit by a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) due to a condition which occurred in line of duty and not due do to the Soldier’s misconduct. Paragraph 4-24b(3) provides that soldiers not having sufficient time in service for retirement would be separated by reason of disability with severance pay. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-40 will normally be honorable unless the soldier is in an entry-level status. The service of Soldiers in an entry-level status will be uncharacterized. 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 all the applicant’s available military records, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army. However, the applicant’s record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214, which was authenticated by the applicant's signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. That DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-40, paragraph 4-24b (3) by reason of disability, severance pay, with an uncharacterized separation of service. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JFL (i.e., disability, severance pay). In connection with such a discharge, the proceedings of a Medical Evaluation Board would have diagnosed the applicant with a medical condition that made him unfit to perform his military duties and referred him to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). A PEB would have determined that the applicant was physically unfit to perform his military duties due to a condition that occurred in line of duty and was not due to his own misconduct. The PEB would have recommended separation with severance pay. The applicant, having been informed of the findings and recommendations of the PEB, would have concurred with the PEB’s findings and recommendations. 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. Absence evidence to the contrary the analyst presumes that the applicant’s separation was initiated while he was still in entry-level status and the applicant’s separation was accomplished within 72 hours following approval by the separation authority. Further, for Soldiers in entry-level status, 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 was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and that the rights of the applicant were fully protected through the separation process. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 061115 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change No change (Character) Change No change (Reason) (Board member names available upon request) IX. 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 not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change 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 and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 061117 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060000758 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages