| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr. | Member | |
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his uncharacterized discharge be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, he was diagnosed with a hernia during basic training. He was issued a waiver from taking the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT), while he was undergoing physical therapy during advanced individual training (AIT). However, before he could receive surgery to repair the hernia, he was given an uncharacterized discharge. He claims that he should have either been medically discharged or given a GD. In support of his application, he submits a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 13 March 1985, he entered the Army for 2 years, for training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 76V (Material Storage and Handling Specialist).
On 19 March 1985, the applicant began basic combat training (BCT) at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. Between 22 March and 16 May 1985, he was formally counseled on at least 14 separate occasions for a myriad of performance related issues that included: not meeting the standard on his first diagnostic APFT; not zeroing his weapon; not achieving standards on the range; failing to pass the APFT on his third attempt; and substandard performance.
On 23 May 1985, the applicant was notified by his commander that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of chapter 11, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of entry level status performance and conduct. The unit commander cited the applicant’s inability to meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of motivation and self-discipline.
On 23 May 1985, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation action and stated his understanding that his service would be uncharacterized based on his being in an entry level status. He completed his election of rights by waiving his right to military counsel and he elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf
On 30 May 1985, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s separation, by reason of entry level status performance and conduct, and directed that his service be uncharacterized. Accordingly, on 31 May 1985, the applicant was separated after completing a total of just 2 months and 18 days of active military service.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 3, paragraph 3-9, identifies service characterizations and outlines the applicable circumstances that authorize each type of characterization. It states, in pertinent part, that the purpose of the entry level status is to provide soldiers a probationary period during which they may be separated with an uncharacterized separation when they have served for less than 180 days at the time a commander initiates separation action, if they are not being separated for misconduct. This is not an adverse separation action and denotes only that the individual had less than 180 days on active duty.
Chapter 11 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for the expeditious separation of members in an entry level status, who are found to lack the necessary motivation, adaptability, self-discipline, ability, or attitude to become productive soldiers. It specifies that members who have not completed more than 180 days of continuous active duty at the time separation action is initiated against them by their commander are considered to be in an entry level status. A GD is not authorized for members separating under this provision and an honorable discharge may only be granted in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The Board notes the applicant’s contentions that he should have received either a medical discharge or a GD because he was discharged prior to hernia repair surgery being done. However, the Board finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s unit commander initiated separation action against him while he was still in an entry level status based on performance and conduct related problems, as evidenced by the extensive counseling record. Further, there is no evidence of record and the applicant has failed to provide evidence that would indicate he should have been processed for separation through medical channels.
3. By regulation, an uncharacterized separation is mandated for members separated while still in an entry level status. A GD is not authorized, and an honorable discharge may only be granted in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty.
4. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant had completed less than 180 days of active military service at the time the separation action was initiated against him and the Board finds his separation was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations.
5. By regulation, a GD is not authorized for members separating in an entry level status and the Board finds no unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty that would warrant the applicant receiving an honorable discharge. Therefore, the Board concludes that his uncharacterized separation was appropriate and accurately reflects his limited period of active duty and overall record of service.
6. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the this requirement.
7. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__MKP__ __EJA__ __RTD___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002068129 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/04/11 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19850513 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR535-200. . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Entry Level Status Performance and Conduct |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.2900 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013286
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of her records to show she received an honorable discharge instead of an uncharacterized discharge. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) she was issued confirms she was discharged due to entry level status performance and conduct in accordance with chapter 11 of Army Regulation 635-200 with an uncharacterized character of service. When separated within the first 180 days, service is usually not characterized...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008558
The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to change his character of service from uncharacterized to honorable. His record contains a DA Form 705 that shows he took a Diagnostic APFT on four occasions during AIT. His record contains four DA Forms 4856 (General Counseling Form) that show he was counseled for failing the diagnostic APFT for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, time.
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120022558
The applicant was separated from the Army on 4 May 2011 with an uncharacterized discharge. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a character reference letter, dated 3 March 2012 in addition to his application. It states a separation will be described as entry-level with service uncharacterized if, at the time separation action is initiated, the Soldier has less than 180 days of continuous active duty service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021266
The applicant requests upgrade of her uncharacterized discharge to an honorable discharge. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of her discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. When separated within the first 180 days, service is usually not characterized unless the circumstances of the separation warrant an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014295
The applicant requests an upgrade of her uncharacterized discharge to an honorable discharge and correction of the narrative reason for her separation from "entry level status performance and conduct" to "medical." The DD Form 214 she was issued confirms she was discharged from active duty by reason of entry level status performance and conduct in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, with an uncharacterized character of service. The service of Soldiers discharged from the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017930
On 1 February 1985, the applicants unit commander informed the applicant of the intent to process him for separation under the provisions of Chapter 11, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of entry level status (ELS) performance and conduct. The separation authority directed that the applicant be separated under the provisions of chapter 11, Army Regulation 635-200 and that his service be uncharacterized based on his ELS. Chapter 11 of the separations regulation provides for the separation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021530
On 1 February 1996, the unit commander notified the applicant he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11. There is no evidence indicating the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for a change to his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The evidence of record confirms the applicant's separation action was initiated while he was in an entry-level status prior to completing 180 days of...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130002168
It states a separation will be described as entry-level with service uncharacterized if, at the time separation action is initiated, the Soldier has less than 180 days of continuous active duty service. The regulation also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldiers service will be uncharacterized when the separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status. NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 0 No Change: 5 Reason...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110017161
Applicant Name: ????? Since I met and even exceeded all of the requirements and standards set by my contract and the OCS SOP I should not receive an uncharacterized discharge, but rather an honorable discharge. Soldiers separated under this Chapter may be awarded an honorable discharge unless an entry level status separation is required under Chapter 3, section II.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007084
On 22 January 1990, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 11, entry level performance and conduct. On 24 January 1990, the separation authority reviewed the proposed separation action and approved an entry-level separation (uncharacterized) in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11. The Army must find that...