Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/09/20	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The  applicant states, in effect, that he requests an upgrade of his discharge to fully honorable.  He contends that he should have been discharged under the provisions of Chapter 5-17 instead of Chapter 13.

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: 100901
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 100914   Chapter: 13      AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance	   RE:     SPD: JHJ   Unit/Location: B Co, 187th OD Bn, Fort Jackson, SC 

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: 100223    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  25 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 	00  Yrs, 06 Mos, 22 Days ?????
Total Service:  		00  Yrs, 06 Mos, 22 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-1		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 92   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Belton, SC 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 1 September 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance for being unable to meet the military standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of a lack of motivation and his inability to adapt to the military, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.    He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 1 September 2010, the applicant waived 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 separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.  Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, however, a fully honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.  

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incidents of unsatisfactory performance.  The analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of the applicant's service was not consistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service.
       
       The applicant contends that he should have been discharged under the provisions of Chapter 5-17, instead of Chapter 13.  However, the analyst determined that Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition like a personality or adjustment disorders solely to spare a Soldier who has performed unsatisfactorily. 
       
       Further, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
        
       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: 27 May 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149, dated (100915); dd Form 214, dated (100914); DA Form 4856 (Developmemntal Counseling Form), dated (100823); Memorandum, Separation Under AR 635-200, Chapter 11; Memorandum, Separation Under AR 635-200, Chapter 11 Notification, two (2) pages; Request for Legal Action, Chapter 13; DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), two (2) pages, dated (100805).

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: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None




































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 AR20100024048
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 3 of 3 pages