IN THE CASE OF: Ms. BOARD DATE: 14 November 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20140015230 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. Presiding Officer I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case. THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of her uncharacterized discharge to general, under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect, she is seeking a new career in law enforcement but her discharge is impeding on her pursuit. The applicant contends it was not her goal to be injured while serving in the Army. She further contends she was a good Soldier. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 25 August 2014 b. Discharge Received: Uncharacterized c. Date of Discharge: 19 July 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Condition, Not A Disability, AR 635-200, Chapter 5-17, JFV, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: B Company, 1-48th Infantry Battalion, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 16 April 2013/3 years, 19 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 months, 4 days h. Total Service: 3 months, 4 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: DEP, 130214-130415, N/A k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-2 l. Military Occupational Specialty: None m. GT Score: NIF n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: None r. Administrative Separation Board: N/A s. Performance Ratings: N/A t. Counseling Statements: No u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 April 2013 for a period of 3 years and 19 weeks. She was 22 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. She completed 3 months and 4 days of active duty service. When her discharge proceedings were initiated, she was serving at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. 2. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, for a physical condition, not a disability, with an uncharacterized characterization of service. The DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JFV (i.e., physical condition, not a disability), with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 3. 3. On 18 July 2013, Orders 199-1307, DA, HQ, US Army Maneuver Support Center, Fort Leonard Wood, MO, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective 19 July 2013. 4. The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: Discharge Order Number 199-1307, dated 18 July 2013, Department of the Army, Headquarters, United States Army Maneuver Support Center of Excellence, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective 19 July 2013. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 21 August 2014, and a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None was provided with the application. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1. Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-17 specifically provides that a Soldier may be separated for other physical or mental conditions not amounting to a disability, which interferes with assignment to or performance of duty and requires that the diagnosis be so severe that the Soldier’s ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired. 2. AR 635-200, paragraph 5-1, states that a Soldier being separated under this paragraph will be awarded a characterization of service of honorable, under honorable conditions, or an uncharacterized description of service if in entry-level status.  3. A general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally inappropriate for individuals separated under the provisions of Chapter 5-17 unless properly notified of the specific factors in the service that warrant such characterization. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge was carefully considered. However, after a careful review of all the available records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue she submitted, there were insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 2. The applicant’s record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. The DD Form 214 shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, AR 635-200, by reason of physical condition, not a disability, with an uncharacterized separation of service and a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 3. 3. 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 separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status. Absence evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the applicant’s separation was initiated while in entry-level status and the applicant’s separation was accomplished within 72 hours following approval by the separation authority. 4. Further, a general, under honorable conditions discharge is not authorized under ELS conditions and an 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 record shows that no such unusual circumstances were present and the service did not warrant an honorable discharge. 5. The applicant contends that an upgrade of her discharge will allow her to pursue a career in law enforcement. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 6. The applicant also contends her discharge should be upgraded because she was a good Soldier and it was not her goal to be injured while serving in the Army. However, the issue the applicant submitted is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. 7. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered. However, the merit of these contentions cannot be established because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be her responsibility to meet this burden of proof since the discharge packet is not available in the official record. 8. Therefore, based on the available evidence and the presumption of government regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 14 November 2014 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 0 No Change: 5 Reason Change: 0 No Change: 5 (Board member names available upon request) Board Action Directed: Issue a new DD Form 214: No Change Characterization to: No Change Change Reason to: No Change Change Authority for Separation: NA Change RE Code to: NA Grade Restoration to: NA Other: NA Legend: AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record FG - Field Grade IADT – Initial Active Duty Training RE - Reentry AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NA - Not applicable SCM- Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial CG - Company Grade Article 15 HD - Honorable Discharge OAD - Ordered to Active Duty UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge CID - Criminal investigation Department MP – Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont) AR20140015230 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1