IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms.

      BOARD DATE:  	22 May 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130000717
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.






      
      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge from uncharacterized to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the command wanted to discharge her prior to 180 days to limit her benefits; she feels like she was ostracized and eliminated from service because she was unable to train.  She desires to receive VA benefits.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		9 January 2013
b. Discharge received:			Uncharacterized
c. Date of Discharge:			12 September 2000
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Disability, Existed Prior to Service-Medical Board, 						AR 635-40, Chapter 5, KFN, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			P Co 266th QM Battalion, Fort Lee, VA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	20 April 2000, 3 years	
g. Current Enlistment Service:	4 months, 23 days
h. Total Service:			4 months, 23 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	None
m. GT Score:				97
n. Education:				13 years
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		None
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		No
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 April 2000 for a period of 3 years.  She was 29 years old at the time of entry and was a high school graduate.  At the time of her discharge she was serving at Fort Lee, VA in advanced individual training (AIT).  Her record does not show any acts of valor or meritorious achievements.







SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicant's discharge from the Army are not contained in the available records.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214, (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature.  

2.  The DD Form 214 indicates that on 12 September 2000, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 5, AR 635-40, for disability, existed prior to service-medical board, with service uncharacterized.  

3.  The DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFN (i.e., disability, existed prior to service-medical board), with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 3.  

4.  On 9 September 2000, Orders 253-0173, DA, U.S. Army Combined Arms Support Command & Fort Lee, Fort Lee, VA, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date:  12 September 2000.

5.  The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

The record does not contain any Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) actions or counseling statements.  

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

The applicant provided a DD Form 293; two DA Forms 689 (Individual Sick Slip); DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile); and a DD Form 214.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY  

1.  Army Regulation 635-40, Chapter 5 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.

2.  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. 

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 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.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, the documents and the issue submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the Army.  Her record 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 presumption of government regularity prevails in the discharge process.  

3.  The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of     Chapter 5, AR 635-40, by reason of disability, existed prior to service-medical board, with an uncharacterized separation of service.  The DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFN (i.e., disability, existed prior to service-medical board).  The proceedings of the Medical Evaluation Board  (MEB) 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, these findings were approved by competent medical authority.  The applicant would have agreed with these findings and the proposed action for administrative separation from the Army.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected through the separation process.

4.  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 action is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status.  

5.  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 record does not indicate such unusual circumstances were present and the applicant’s service did not warrant an honorable discharge.  


6.  The applicant contends the command wanted to discharge her prior to 180 days to limit her benefits; she feels like she was ostracized and eliminated from service because she was unable to train.  The applicant's contentions were carefully considered.  However, a determination as to the merit of these contentions cannot be made because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown.  The applicant must meet the burden of proof by providing the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet 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 she must meet the burden of proof since the discharge packet is not available in the official record. 

7.  The applicant desires to receive VA benefits.  However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.

8.  Therefore, based on the available evidence and the presumption of government regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief. 




























SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review       Date:  22 May 2013          Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA

Board Vote:
Character Change:  0	No Change:  5
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		No
Change Characterization to:	No Change
Change Reason to:			No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Other:					NA



















Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20130000717

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1