Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/12/05	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he served honorably and received the AUSA Honor Award; therefore, he is requesting an upgrade to a honorable discharge so he can receive veteran’s benefits and because he feels it will assist him when he applies for future jobs.

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: 110318
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 110420   Chapter: 7 Sec III      AR: 635-200
Reason: Defective Enlistment Agreement	   RE:     SPD: KDS   Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 3rd Battalion (OSC), 11th Infantry Regiment, Fort Benning, Georgia  

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:  22
Current ENL Date: 101108    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Total Service:  		0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that the applicant enlisted in the Army as a Specialist/E-4 to attend Warrant/Officer Candidate School.  
       
       On 7 March 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of disenrollment from warrant/officer candidate training due to failing to meet the OML APFT cut off twice, through no fault of his own, which prevented him from completion of the course.  
       
       On 18 March 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 7, paragraph 7-16e, AR 635-200, by reason of inability of the U.S. Army to fulfill the former Soldier's enlistment agreement.  
       
       On 18 March 2011, the applicant requested to be separated under Chapter 7-16, for a Unfulfilled Service Agreement.  
       
       On 11 April 2011, counsel reviewed the Chapter action and determined it to be legally sufficient.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army  under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 7, paragraph 7-16e, for Defective or Unfulfilled Enlistment Agreement.  
       
       On 18 April 2011, the separation authority directed the applicant's discharge from the Army with service as uncharacterized.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 7, paragraph 7-16b, of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that an unfulfilled enlistment commitment exists when the Soldier receives a written enlistment commitment for which the Soldier is qualified and it cannot be fulfilled by the Army through no fault of the Soldier.  Soldiers separated under this Chapter may be awarded an honorable discharge unless an entry level status separation is required under Chapter 3, section II.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of the Applicant's military records, the issue and the documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the Applicant's discharge.  
       
       The applicant's service was uncharacterized because he was in entry-level status.  A Soldier is in entry-level status (ELS) 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 the separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status.  After a careful review of all the applicant's military records during the period of enlistment under review and the issue [and documents] he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The evidence of record shows the applicant on 18 March 2011, voluntarily requested to be separated under the provisions of Chapter 7, Section III, AR 635-200 by reason of defective enlisted agreement.  The applicant's service was uncharacterized because he was in entry-level status.  A Soldier is in entry-level status (ELS) 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.  A general, under honorable conditions discharge is not authorized under ELS conditions and 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.  
       
       Additionally, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's employment issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       The analyst also noted the applicant's issue about his desire to receive veteran's benefits.  However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.
       In view of the foregoing, 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: 18 May 2012         Location: Washington, D. C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, 2 training evaluations, AUSA award, bachelor of science diploma, personnel action form, reference letter, memorandum for record, dated 15 February 2011 and a DD Form 214.

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.  

Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, reentry code as “3.”  In view of this error, the Board voted to administratively change block 27, reentry code to “1."  Except for the foregoing modification, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.





























        
IX.  Board Decision						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change NA    No change NA
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: 
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




ARCHIE L. DAVIS III
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board



BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
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 AR20110024108
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 4 pages