PART II - APPLICATION DATA

      (Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy)

1.  Character of Discharge:  Honorable

2.  Date of discharge (or REFRAD):  900927

3.  Authority for separation:

      a.  Regulation:  Chapter 13, AR 635-200

      b.  Reason:  Unsatisfactory Performance

4.  Prior review(s):  NONE



                         PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

                 SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

1.    Service data:                              2.  Awards and
    decorations:
                                           AAM
    a.  Period entered for:  4 Years               GCMDL
    b.  Entry date:  870803                        ASR
    c.  Age:  17 Years   DOB:  700506              OSR


    d.  Educational level:  HS Grad


    e.  Aptitude area score:
          GT:  114                               3.  Highest grade
achieved:
    f.  Length of Service:                         E4
          3 Year(s)  1 Month(s)  25 Day(s)


                                               4.  Performance evaluations:

                                                   NONE

                         PART III - SERVICE HISTORY
           SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued

5.  Periods of unauthorized absence:  NONE

    Status       Inclusive dates
      AWOL

      Mil conf

      Civil conf

      Other


6.  Nonjudicial punishment:  NONE

      Date  Offense(s)



7.  Court-Martial data:  NONE

      a.  SCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


      b.  SPCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


      c.  GCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


8.    Remarks:  NONE


                       SECTION B - Prior Service Data
                                    NONE

Other discharge(s):

      Service    From  To    Type Discharge





                         PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

                       SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l.  Facts and Circumstances:

      a.  Evidence of record shows that on 19 September 1990, the unit
commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under
the provisions of Chapter l3, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory
performance, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The
reasons for the unit commander’s proposed separation action were:  The
applicant’s documented poor performance and a recommendation by competent
medical authority that the applicant be discharged.  He was advised of his
rights.  The applicant consulted with 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
service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The separation
authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the
applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of honorable.


      b.  On 27 September 1999, the applicant was discharged.  At the time
of discharge, the applicant had completed 3 years, 1 month, and 25 days of
active military service in the period under review.

2.  Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action:  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, to include separation for those
individuals who fail to maintain Army physical standards.  Initiation of
separation proceedings is required for individuals without medical
limitations who have two consecutive failures of the Army physical fitness
test or who are eliminated for cause from Noncommissioned Officer Education
System courses unless the responsible commander chooses to impose a bar to
reenlistment per AR 601-280.  Service of individuals separated because of
unsatisfactory performance will be characterized as honorable or under
honorable conditions as warranted by their military records.




                      SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS


1.  Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel.
    As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293.

2.  Exhibit(s) submitted:

      A-1:  DD Form 293, dated 040428, with multiple enclosure(s).
      A-2:  Counsel Issues:  NONE
      B-l:  Other Documents: NONE


                   PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED)

              SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion


Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor      ( ) Legal Advisor



      a.  Medical prehearing comments (if applicable):


      b.  Legal prehearing comments (if applicable):











                         PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING

                      SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits

1.  Review/hearing information:


      a. Type requested:
         ( X ) Records review             (   ) Hearing

      b. Type Held:
         ( X )Records review              (   ) Hearing
                                          (   ) Tender Offer

      c. Review/hearing location and date:  Washington, D.C. on 5 January
2005.

      d. Appearance by:
         Applicant                 (   ) Yes   ( X ) No
         Counsel                   (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

      e.  Applicant testified:     (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

      f.  Counsel presentation:    (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

      g.  Witness(es) testified:   (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

2.  Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing:
                        PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS

1.  a.  Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity:

          ( X )  Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A
              of this case report and directive.
          (   )  Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as
              follows:
          ( X )  Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as
              follows:

        Board Issue:  (3)  The narrative reason for discharge is
inequitable.

      b.  Request:  (   ) Recharacterization     ( X ) Change of Reason

2.  Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on
issues of propriety and/or equity:

      a.  Propriety:   The applicant has not submitted an issue of
                   propriety and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an
                   issue of propriety to change the discharge.

      b.  Equity:      The parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to
                   the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI,
                   Paragraph 1, above.

        (1-2)  The issues are rejected.  Individuals are assigned Reentry
Eligibility (RE) codes based on their service records or the reason for
discharge.  The applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3
because he was separated under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 13, by
reason of unsatisfactory performance.  Army regulations stipulate that
individuals separated by reason of unsatisfactory performance will receive
an RE code of 3.  An RE Code of 3 indicates that the applicant requires a
waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.  If the applicant desires to
reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his
eligibility to reenlist.  Those individuals can best advise a former
service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to
process waivers of RE codes.  See response to issue (3), below.

        (3)  The issue is accepted.  The Board carefully examined the
applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review.
 There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as
well as the incidents of unsatisfactory performance.  Notwithstanding the
propriety of the applicant’s discharge, the Board found that the narrative
reason for discharge is now inequitable.  The Board determined that
mitigating medical circumstances impaired the applicant’s ability to
satisfactorily complete his enlistment.  However, the Board noted that the
applicant provided over three years of honorable service, attained the
grade of specialist/E-4, and received both the Army Achievement Medal and
the Good Conduct Medal.  Given the above factors and the elapse of time,
the Board concluded that the narrative reason for discharge no longer
accurately reflects the nature and quality of the applicant’s service.
Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of a
change in narrative reason to Secretarial Authority.  This action does not
entail a change in RE code.

3.  Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s):  NONE


                           PART VII - BOARD ACTION
                   SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote

1.    Board conclusion(s):

      The discharge was:

      ( X ) Proper.
      (   ) Improper as to characterization.  Change characterization to
                                               .
      (   ) Improper as to reason.  Change reason to
                                   under                      .

      ( X ) Equitable.
      (   ) Inequitable as to characterization.  Change characterization to
                                         .
      ( X ) Inequitable as to reason.  Change reason to Secretarial
           Authority
            under Chapter 5, AR 635-200.
      (   ) Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for
           separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should
           be changed to                      under
                                   .

2.  Voting record:      Change   No Change
                  Reason       4         1
    Characterization       0         5

        The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in
Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address
below.  The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right
corner of this document.

                  Department of the Army Review Boards Agency
                  ATTN:  Promulgation Team
                  1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor
                  Arlington, VA  22202-4508



3.  Minority views:  NONE
                           PART VII - BOARD ACTION
                 SECTION B - Verification and Authentication

Case report reviewed and verified

                          
Ms. McKim-Spilker
Case Reviewing Official

                     PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
                            SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

TO: ARBA Support Division-St Louis      Date:  7 January 2005

     The Army Discharge Review Board, established under the provisions of
Section 30, Public Law 346, 78th Congress, 22 June 1944 and codified as
Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553, in the case of the applicant
named in Part I directs that the ARBA Support Division-St Louis issue a new
DD Form 2l4 to the applicant which reflects the following directed
change(s):

           ( X ) Change reason and authority for discharge to
            Secretarial Authority, AR 635-200.
           ( X ) Other (see remarks below).

Remarks:  This action does not entail a change in RE code.

                          SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


ROBERT L. HOUSE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
   Review Board

Official:




MARY E. SHAW
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder

EXHIBITS:
A - Application for review of discharge                  C - Other
B - Material submitted by applicant

INDEX RECORD:

AR Number:  200040000758                  INDEX NUMBERS:  A9456
Date of Review:  050105                                   A1200
Character of Service:  HD                                 A0101
Date of Discharge:  900927
Authority:  AR 635-200 C13
Reason:  A4900
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation:  MD 4-1 A





                           PART IX - VOTING RECORD

    Name                                   Reason          Characterization
                                           CHANGE   NC     HON  UHC   NC
UNCHAR

    1. LTC PROCTOR, ESMERALDA G.  Mbr    X                       X       

    2.      Mbr          X                 X       

    3.      Mbr    X                       X       

    4.      Mbr    X                       X       

    5.      PO     X                       X