Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/03/02	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 his discharge was improper because he could have completed his service, he desired to remain in the Army and the issue did not affect his service.  

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: 	NIF   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 050425   Chapter: 5-11      AR: 635-200
Reason: Failure to Meet Procurement Medical Fitness Standards	   RE:     SPD: JFW   Unit/Location: B Co, 187th OD Bn, Fort Jackson, SC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 041004/OIADT    Current ENL Term: NIF Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00  Yrs, 06  Mos, 22  Days ?????
Total Service:  		00  Yrs, 11  Mos, 22  Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-920611-920731/UNC
                                       ARNG-040624-041003/NA
                                         (Concurrent Service)
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  

Post Service Accomplishments: The evidence of records shows the applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard State of Massachusetts on (070321) for a period of three (3) years.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence record is void of the orders releasing the applicant's from the active duty training, discharging him from the Reserve of the Army and returning him to his National Guard unit are not contained in the available records.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature.  
       
       
       
       The DD Form 214, indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-11, AR 635-200, by reason of failed medical/physical procurement standards, with service uncharacterized.  Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JFW (i.e., failed medical/physical procurement standards), with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3." 

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200, provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-11 specifically provides that Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards, when accepted for enlistment, or who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entry on active duty or active duty training or initial entry training will be separated.  A medical proceeding, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within six months of the Soldier’s initial entrance on active duty, that the condition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry into the military service had it been detected at that time, and the medical condition does not disqualify the Soldier from retention in the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3.  The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of regulation will normally be honorable, but will be uncharacterized if the Soldier is in an entry-level status.  Army Regulation 635-200, states that 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 records during the period of enlistment under review and the issues submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The evidence record is void of the orders releasing the applicant's from the active duty training, discharging him from the Reserve of the Army and returning him to his National Guard unit are not contained in the available records.  However the applicant’s record does contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  
       
       The DD Form 214, shows the applicant was released from active duty training under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-11, AR 635-200, by reason of failed medical/physical procurement standards, with service uncharacterized.  In connection with such a discharge, the proceedings of an Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) would have revealed that the applicant had a medical condition that was disqualifying for enlistment and that it existed prior to entry on active duty.  Subsequently, competent medical authority would have had to approve the findings of the EPSBD.  The applicant would have had to agree with the findings and the proposed action for administrative separation from the Army.    
       
       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 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 no such unusual circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and the applicant's service did not warrant an honorable discharge.
       
       The applicant contends his discharge was improper because he could have completed his service, he desired to remain in the Army and the issue did not affect his service.  There is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that his discharge was improper. 
       
       Furthermore, the applicant's contention was carefully considered.  However, the analyst is unable to determine whether his contention has merit because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown.  The burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will still be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record. 
       
       Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that based on the DD Form 214, 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 August 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated (120219).

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						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(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: None

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 AR20120005162
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 4 pages