Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/10/06	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that she should have been given an under honorable conditions characterization on her DD Form 214; however, it states uncharacterized.

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: 100816
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 100902   Chapter: 5-17       AR: 635-200
Reason: Condition, Not a Disability	   RE:     SPD: JFV   Unit/Location: Company E, 787th Military Police Battalion, 14th Military Police Brigade, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 

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:  18
Current ENL Date: 100427    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	0 Yrs, 4 Mos, 6 Days ?????
Total Service:  		0 Yrs, 4 Mos, 6 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 101   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 16 August 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, AR 635-200, by reason of other designated physical or mental condition for being diagnosed  by competent medical authority with bilateral foot pain, left ankle stress fracture, not resolving with conservative treatment for the past 5 weeks; which, she did not have prior to service.  She went on a 30 days convalescent leave in a cast and crutches and she is not able to run, jump or march without pain and stiffness in her foot and the X-rays show a left fibular non-displaced fracture.  The unit commander recommended the applicant’s discharge with an entry level uncharacterized separation of service.  She was advised of her rights.  
       
       On 20 August 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Service.  On 20 August 2010, the intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an uncharacterized discharge.  
       
       On 25 August 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with an uncharacterized separation of service.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-17 specifically provides that a Soldier may be separated for other physical or mental conditions not amounting to a disability under Army Regulation 635-40, which interferes with assignment to or performance of duty.  The regulation requires that the condition interferes with the Soldiers’ ability to perform duty, and requires that the diagnosis be so severe that the Soldier’s ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired.  Army Regulation 635-200 states that a Soldier being separated under this paragraph will be awarded a characterization of service of honorable, under honorable conditions, or an uncharacterized description of service if in entry-level status.  A general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally inappropriate for individuals separated under the provisions of Chapter 5-17 unless properly notified of the specific factors in the service that warrant such characterization.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the document she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The evidence of record shows the applicant while in training status was diagnosed by competent medical authority with bilateral foot pain, left ankle stress fracture, not resolving with conservative treatment for the past 5 weeks; which, she did not have prior to service.  She went on a 30 days convalescent leave in a cast and crutches and she is not able to run, jump or march without pain and stiffness in her foot and the X-rays show a left fibular non-displaced fracture.   
       
       The applicant’s service was uncharacterized because she was in an 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.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue that her discharge should be honorable; however, 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 her service did not warrant an honorable discharge.  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.  
       
       In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that 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: 3 June 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 6 October 2010.

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: No Change										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change




























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 AR20100025227
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages