Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/02/13 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 149 and attached document 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: 030414 Discharge Received: Date: 030418 Chapter: 11 AR: 635-200 Reason: Entry Level Performance and Conduct RE: SPD: JGA Unit/Location: D Company, 120th Adjutant General Battalion, (Reception), Fort Jackson, SC 29207. 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: 20 Current ENL Date: 030226 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 1 Mos, 23 Days ????? Total Service: 0 Yrs, 1 Mos, 23 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: 99 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 14 April 2003, 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 in that you repeatedly failed the PT Assessment, with an uncharacterized discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant waived 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 service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. On 15 April 2003, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts, approved the recommendation for separation from the service and directed that the applicant be separated 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. The regulation requires uncharacterized service for separation under this chapter. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, document and the issue he 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 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 his separation is initiated while the soldier is 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. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable. In view of the foregoing, the 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: 26 November 2008 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation ????? IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change ????? No change ????? Reason - Change ????? No change ????? (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: ????? Other: ????? RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: ????? ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080003088 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages