Application Receipt Date: 051227

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change

Issues: See DD Form 293

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?
Yes    No        Tender Offer:        

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits

III.  Original Character of Discharge
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge:    Date: 050728
Discharge Received:     Date: 050802
Chapter: 4-28B(3)    AR: 635-40
Reason: Disability, Severance Pay
RE:     SPD: JFL
Unit/Location:

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  850608
Current ENL Date: 050224    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  19 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 9 Days      
Total Service:  0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 9 Days      
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E1
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No
MOS: None   GT: 88   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record:
Current Address:
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicant’s
discharge are not contained in the available records.  However, the
evidence of record contains a properly consituted DD Form 214, which was
authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  This document identifies the
reason and characterization of the discharge and the Board presumed
Government regularity in the discharge process.  His DD Form 214 indicates
that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4-24B(3), Army
Regulation 635-40, for Disability, Severance Pay, with service
uncharacterized.  Further, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JFL
(i.e., disability, severance pay).  On 28 July 2005, Department of Army,
Headquarters Unitd States Infantry Center, Fort Benning, Georgia 31905-
5000, issued Orders 209-2208, which discharged the applicant from the
Regular Army, effective date:  2 August 2005.





      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, and
the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would
merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The applicant’s record is
void of specific facts and circumstances which led to the applicant’s
discharge from the Army.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates that he was
discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4, Paragraph 4-24B(3), AR 635-40
by reason of disability, severance pay, with service uncharacterized.  In
connection with such a discharge, the proceedings of a Medical Evaluation
Board would have 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).  A PEB would have determined that the applicant was
physically unfit to perform his military duties due to a condition that
occurred in line of duty and was not due to his own misconduct.  The PEB
would have recommended separation with severance pay.  The applicant,
having been informed of the findings and recommendations of the PEB, would
have concurred with the PEB’s findings and recommendations.  Department of
Army, Headquarters United States Infantry Center, Fort Benning, Georgia
31905-5000, issued Orders 209-2208, dated 28 July 2005, which discharged
the applicant from the Regular Army, with an effective date of 2 August
2005.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the analyst was
compelled to presume administrative regularity in the discharge process.
The applicant’s service was uncharacterized because he was in entry-level
status (i.e., the first 180 days of continuous active duty.)  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.  Therefore, the reason for discharge
and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable.



























VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing:                  Date: 25 October 2006
Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A

Exhibits Submitted: N/A



VIII.  Board Decision
The discharge was:                Proper           Improper
                                             Equitable        Inequitable

The characterization of service was:   Proper            Improper
                                             Equitable        Inequitable

The narrative reasons were:             Equitable        Inequitable

DRB voting record:                      Change     No change    (Character)
                                        Change     No change    (Reason)
                                   (Board member names available upon
request)

IX.  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 not to change it.
























Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. John Zangas, Examiner

X.  Board Action Directed
No Change
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to:      
Other:      
RE Code:
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority:

ROBERT L. HOUSE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official:


ESMERALDA G. PROCTOR         DATE: 27 October 2006
Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder