Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 080103	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See attached DD Form 293 submitted by the Applicant.

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: 980629
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 980814   Chapter: 4-24B(3)       AR: 635-40
Reason: Disability, Severance Pay	   RE:     SPD: JFL   Unit/Location: F Co, 1st Bn, 81st Armor, 1st Armor Training Bde, Fort Knox, KY 

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:  24
Current ENL Date: 980217    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 05 Mos, 29 Days ?????
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 05 Mos, 29 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 96   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Gainesville, TX
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed by the Applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 8 March 1998, while attending basic training, the Applicant sustained an ankle injury determined to be in the line of duty.  On 29 June 1998 the unit commander recommended the Applicant be considered unfit for reasonable performance of duty due to the ankle injury.  On 10 July 1998, the Applicant was referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for determination of fitness for duty.  On 20 July 1998, the PEB determined the Applicant's injury prevented reasonable performance of duties required by grade and military specialty.  On 22 July 1998, the Applicant was advised of and concurred with the finding and recommendation of the PEB.  The Applicant's DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JFL (i.e., disability, severance pay).  On 11 August 1998, Department of Army, Headquarters, US Army Armor Center, Fort Knox, KY 40121, issued Orders 223-0151, which discharged the Applicant from the Regular Army, with an effective date of 14 August 1998.
        

       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 available 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 DD Form 214 indicates he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-40, paragraph 4-24B (3) by reason of disability, severance pay, with an uncharacterized separation of service.  Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JFL (i.e., disability, severance pay).  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 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 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.  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.  The evidence of record reveals the Applicant’s separation was initiated while he was still in entry-level status.  Further, for Soldiers in entry-level status, 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.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and that the rights of the Applicant were fully protected through the separation process.  The analyst noted the Aplicant's issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  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: 24 October 2008         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

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
								         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: No Change										
RE Code: 									 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080000242
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages