Application Receipt Date: 060914	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See applicant DD Form 293.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?  
Yes    No        Tender Offer:   ?????

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Original Character of Discharge
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge:    Date: NIF
Discharge Received:     Date: 050208   
Chapter: 13    AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance
RE:     SPD: JHJ
Unit/Location: HHC, 20th Engineer Brigade, Fort Bragg, NC 28310-5000 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  850508  
Current ENL Date: 021002    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 02  Yrs, 04 Mos, 07 Days ?????
Total Service:  02  Yrs, 04 Mos, 07 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 21B1P Combat Engineer   GT: 105   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 11 September 2002, 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 (failed two consecutive record Army Physical Fitness Tests on 1 July and 29 September), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  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 intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  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 discharge, under honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate, but an 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 and the issues he submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as the incidents of unsatisfactory performance.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  While the applicant's unsatisfactory performance is not condoned, the analyst found that the length and quality of the applicant's service, and the supporting document from the VA Medical Center, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  
      
      Furthermore, the analyst found that the narrative reason for separation was inequitable.  Regulations currently in effect list the reason for the applicant’s discharge as physical standards.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the narrative reason for separation on the DD Form 214 be changed to "Physical Standards" with the corresponding separation code of "JFT."  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 24 October 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




VIII.  Board Decision
The discharge was:			Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The characterization of service was:   Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The narrative reasons were: 	       	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

DRB voting record:  		      Change 5    No change 0   - Character
		 			      Change 5    No change 0   - Reason
					      (Board member names available upon request)

IX.  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 characterization of service was too harsh and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  

Furthermore, the Board found that the narrative reason for separation was inequitable. Regulations currently in effect list the reason for the applicant’s discharge as physical standards.  Accordingly, the Board voted to change the narrative reason for separation on the DD Form 214  to "Physical Standards" with the corresponding separation code of "JFT."  














Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: "Physical Standards" with the corresponding separation code of "JFT" under provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200.
Other: NA
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 2 November 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060013040

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages