Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/04/27	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, the upgrade will greatly impact his future for the better; he remembers his role as squad leader in basic training as a great experience; and he often wishes he served his country for the full term he enlisted for.  He states the general discharge he received in mid 2008, could prevent him from achieving his goal of being recruited in the [ redacted ] Police Department.  He states he injured his back while training at Fort Benning, Georgia.  The doctor he saw did not find anything medically wrong with him, but he still felt a great deal of pain while training.  He adds he wanted a discharge because he could not continue to train because of his back pain.  He states he spent more than a month at the 30th AG waiting for an appointment with a doctor and his discharge paperwork.  He states two days prior to his discharge, the doctor he saw informed him that he did have a great deal of injury to his back that needed to be corrected, which meant more time under medical care and probably months to cure his back.  He adds he refused to remain under the Army’s care and wanted to go home, so he signed all the paperwork and returned home.  Once he was home, a chiropractor he saw informed him he required back treatments over a period of time.  He then applied for medical benefits with the VA and his application was denied.  However, he received a second medical opinion and he now understands that he had sustained his injuries prior to his enlistment, and all the moving around and physical activities during basic training exacerbated his previous injuries.  He concludes that now he is well and after three years of employment with security and loss prevention, he would like to join the [ redacted ] Police Department, and reiterates that the only thing preventing him from achieving his goal is the general discharge he received from the Army. 

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: 080916
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080930   Chapter: 11       AR: 635-200
Reason: Entry Level Performance and Conduct	   RE:     SPD: JGA   Unit/Location: E Co, 30th AG, 192nd IN BDE, Fort Benning, GA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080826 - disrespectful in language toward a drill sergeant (an NCO) on (080818), forfeiture of $290 (suspended) and reduced to E-1 (CG)

080917 - vacation of suspended punishment for disrespectful in deportment toward 1SG by not going to parade rest (CG) 

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 080616    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  16 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 03 Mos, 14 Days ?????
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 03 Mos, 14 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11X (Infantry Recruit)   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  San Diego, CA
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 16 September 2008, 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 with an uncharacterized discharge, for failure to adapt to military life; disobeying orders and regulations; refusal to participate in training and for lack of motivation, coping skills, and Army Values; and receiving an Article 15 punishment for being disrespectful toward an NCO.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 16 September 2008, the applicant waived his right to consult with a 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 Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with an uncharacterized discharge.  
       
       On 18 September 2008, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s separation from the Army 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 cannot meet the minimum standards for training, have demonstrated that they are not qualified for retention because they cannot 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 an uncharacterized discharge for separation under this Chapter.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst noted from the evidence of record that the applicant received an uncharacterized separation while in an entry-level status (ELS).  Although the applicant contends he received a general discharge, there is nothing in the current record that reflects he received a general discharge.
       
       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 the separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status.  
       
       A general, under honorable conditions discharge is not authorized under ELS conditions.  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 no such unusual circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and the former Soldier’s service did not warrant an honorable discharge.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       The analyst noted the applicant’s issue about his service connected disability, as outlined at the onset of his self-authored document and the VA documents that accompanied his application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for his discharge and characterization of service granted.
       
       Finally, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support his contention that he opted to be discharged because of his medical condiction.   In fact, the applicant’s Article 15 and numerous negative counseling statements justify a pattern of misconduct.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity and he has not provided any documentation or further evidence in support of his request for an upgrade of his discharge.
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined 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: 16 November 2011         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149 with self-authored statement, dated 21 April 2011; VA letter of denial, dated 8 April 2009 and a doctor's statement. 

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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

Official:




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder







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 AR20110009555
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages