PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:


         BOARD DATE: 19 SEPTEMBER 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002070209


         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Joann H. Langston		Chairperson
Ms. Melinda M. Darby		Member
Mr. Ronald E. Blakely		Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS :

1. The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

---

2. The applicant requests that the reason for his separation, his separation and reentry codes, and the authority for his separation be changed. He states, in effect, that the reason he was discharged was not because of performance and conduct problems, but because of "compassionate/hardship" reasons. He states that his mother and sister had been assaulted and that the assailants had been released from prison and were threatening his mother and vandalizing her home. He states that his mother needed him at home to "become the temporary guardian of [his] 10 year old sister" because his mother feared for her safety. He notes that his performance and conduct were not an issue and submits copies of a police and medical report, a newspaper clipping, and statements from his mother and fiancée regarding conversations they had with the applicant's unit commander and first sergeant. He also submits a copy of a document confirming the name of his mother and a birth certificate for his 10 year old sister, as well as copies of training documents indicating successful completion of basic training and qualification as an expert with the hand grenade. The applicant indicated that he had made an application to have the error corrected in 1995 but "never received any information back indicating that this was resolved."

3. Information available to the Board indicates the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 January 1995 for a period of 4 years. The applicant was 19 years old at the time he entered active duty.

4. According to the police report, submitted by the applicant in support of his request, his mother (Vicki) and sister (Marlena) were assaulted by two males in March 1994, nearly a year prior to his enlistment in the Army. Although the applicant's entire enlistment packet was not in records available to the Board, there are documents which confirm his mother's name was Vicki and his sister's name was Marlena. The applicant's 10 year old sister was named Crystal.

5. Following the applicant's enlistment in the Regular Army, he was assigned to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri for training. He successfully completed basic training and on 23 March 1995 commenced his specialty training.

6. On 10 April 1995 the applicant was counseled by a staff sergeant who indicated that he was recommending the applicant "for entry level separation." The staff sergeant noted that his recommendation was "based on the fact that you are undergoing extreme family problems and emotional distress." He also indicated that during training the applicant had shown that he was "a team player and capable of becoming a productive member of the United States Army, but because of [his] exteme [sic] family problems," it was in the applicant's "best
interest" that he be "released from active duty to take care of [his] family situation." Between 11 and 14 April 1995 the applicant was counseled by other members of his chain of command regarding his family situation and his emotional problems, which were affecting his military performance. One of the members of his chain of command noted in his counseling statement that the applicant had "received some bad news from back home about family problems which has made you emotionally distraught."

7. On 14 April 1995 the applicant acknowledged receipt of the recommendation to administratively separate him from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 11 (Entry Level Status Performance and Conduct). In the notification memorandum, which the applicant acknowledged, his unit commander stated that he was recommending separation because the applicant's "emotional problems" were hampering him from becoming a productive service member and that his "concentration level and motivation" were becoming a negative influence in his unit. The commander also stated that "until your family matters are resolved, you will not be a productive member of the Army." The applicant waived his attendant rights, including his right to consult with counsel.

8. The recommendation was approved and on 24 April 1995 the applicant was discharged. His separation report notes that the authority for his separation was "AR 635-200, CHAP 11;" his reason for separation was "ENTRY LEVEL PERFORMANCE AND CONDUCT;" his separation code was "JGA;" and his reentry code was "RE-3."

9. Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 11, establishes the policies and provisions for the separation of enlisted soldiers "because of unsatisfactory performance or minor disciplinary infractions (or both) while in an entry level status." It states that separation of a soldier in entry level status is warranted by unsatisfactory performance or minor disciplinary infractions as evidence by "inability, lack of reasonable effort, or failure to adapt to the military environment…." Such separations are involuntary. Army Regulation 635-5-1, which prescribes the specific authorities, reasons for separation, and the separation program designator codes, states that the separation document of soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 11, will reflect "Entry Level Performance and Conduct" as the reason for their separation and that their separation code will be recorded as "JGA." A reentry code of "3" is also appropriate.

10. Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 6, provides for the separation of enlisted soldiers based on hardship. It notes that hardship exists "when in circumstances not involving death or disability of a member of the soldier's immediate family, separation from the Service will materially affect the care or support of the family by alleviating undue and genuine hardship."

11. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-3, provides for the separation of soldiers for the convenience of the Government. In pertinent part, it states that separation of soldiers for the convenience of the Government is the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army based on a determination that separation is in the best interests of the Army. Soldiers separated for the convenience of the Government who are in an entry level status receive an "uncharacterized description of service." Army Regulation 635-5-1 states that soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-3, will reflect "Secretarial Authority" as the reason for their separation and that their separation code will be recorded as "JFF." A reentry code of "3" is also appropriate in this case.

12. In 1997 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's 1995 application to change the characterization and reason for discharge.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. Although the applicant has not submitted any evidence which confirms his contention that his presence was required to ensure the safety of his 10 year old sister, the information contained in counseling statements from his chain of command tend to support a conclusion that such was likely the case; or at the very least that the applicant's family situation was impacting on his emotional state. The counseling statements indicate that the applicant's inability to concentrate and participate effectively in training was directly related to his "emotional problems." There is no indication, in available records, that the applicant had any incidents of misconduct or that he was an unsatisfactory performer as a result of "inability, lack of reasonable effort, or failure to adapt to the military environment."

2. The Board concludes that a narrative reason for separation which reflects entry level performance and conduct could be interpreted as a negative statement about an individual's service while in the military. There is no evidence that indicates the applicant ever applied for a hardship discharge and he has not provided any documentation which would enable the Board to conclude, with certainty, that a separation for hardship would be appropriate. However, because the Board is convinced that it was the applicant's "emotional problems," and not any unsatisfactory performance or conduct, which served as the basis for his involuntary separation, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate, and in the interest of justice, to correct the applicant's records to show that he was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-3; that his narrative reason for separation be changed to reflect "Secretarial Authority;" and that his separation code be changed to "JFF." His characterization of service and reentry code would not change.

3. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.




RECOMMENDATION:

1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-3; that his narrative reason for separation be changed to reflect "Secretarial Authority;" and that his separation code be changed to "JFF."

2. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:

__JHL___ __MMD _ __REB __ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  ___Joann H. Langston___
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002070209
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20020919
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	110.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.