Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2010/07/15 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he requests an upgrade of his discharge to fully honorable. He contends that his duty performance was exemplary up to the time of his injury. He further contends that the discharge is prreventing him from receiving benefits under the State of Wisconsin Regulations even though he is receiving VA benefits. 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: NIF Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 070921 Chapter: 4-24b(3) AR: 635-40 Reason: Disability, Severance Pay RE: SPD: JFL Unit/Location: G Co, 232nd Med Bn (Trainee), Fort Sam Houston, TX 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: 070328 Current ENL Term: 04 Years with a medical waiver (070313) Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 05 Mos, 24 Days ????? Total Service: 00 Yrs, 05 Mos, 24 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: 111 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Manitowoc, WI Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 17 August 2007, a Medical Evaluation Board 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). On 5 September 2007, a PEB determined that the applicant was physically unfit to perform his military duties due to a condition (posterior thoracic pain and right knee retropatellar pain) that occurred in line of duty and was not due to his own misconduct. The PEB recommended separation with severance pay. On 6 September 2007, having been informed of the findings and recommendations of the PEB, the applicant concurred with the PEB’s findings and recommendations and waived a formal hearing of his case. On 21 September 2007, HQS, U.S. Army Medical Department Center & School, Fort Sam Houston, TX, Orders 264-0101, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army effective: 21 September 2007, with an uncharacterized discharge. 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 military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The proceedings of the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) determined that the applicant was physically unfit to perform his military duties due to a condition that occurred in the line of duty and was not due to his own misconduct. The applicant agreed with these findings and waived a formal hearing of his case. 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. 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. 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. 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. The applicant contends that his duty performance was exemplary up to the time of his injury. The analyst considered the quality of the applicant's service during the initial portion of the period of enlistment under review. However, this period of service was determined not to be sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. The applicant further contends that his discharge (i.e., uncharacterized) is preventing him from receiving benefits under the State of Wisconsin Regulations even though he is receiving VA benefits. This is not an adverse separation action and denotes only that the individual had less than 180 days on active duty. Furthermore, regarding the applicant's contention about being unable to receive benefits under the State of Wisconsin Regulations; this contention does not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), utilizing the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. Therefore, 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: 8 April 2011 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: [ redacted ] Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149, dated (100709); Letter, Veterans Service Office, dated (100709); Letter, State of Wisconsin, Department of Veterans Affairs, dated (100625); Letter, Department of Veterans Affairs, dated (100412); Discharge Orders 264-0101, dated (070921); DD Form 214, dated (070921); Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings, two (2) pages, dated (070905), with six (6) pages of Medical Documents; Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) Proceedings, dated (070817), with eight (8) pages of Medical Documents. 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: None 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 AR20100019297 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 pages