Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/10/10	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 149 in lieu of a DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant.

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: 061208
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070110   Chapter: 13       AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance	   RE:     SPD: JHJ   Unit/Location: B Battery, 2nd Battalion, 43rd Air and Missile Defense, 108th Air Defense Artillery Brigade, Fort Bliss, TX 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 061025, Wrongfully leave the scene of an accident without making his identity known, (060919); reduction to Private (E-3); forfeiture of $394.00 pay per month for one month, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (060124); extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG)

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: Reenl/050913    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	1 Yrs, 3 Mos, 28 Days ?????
Total Service:  		4 Yrs, 4 Mos, 28 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 020813-050912/HD 
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 14E10 Patriot FC Operator   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea (050615-051101)   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, GCMDL, NDSM, GWTSM, KDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 8 December 2006, 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 in that he received a Company Grade Article 15 for fleeing the scene of an accident; received numerous negative counseling statements for disrespecting, both verbally and in deportment noncommissioned officers in the unit, along with that, he has been aggressive towards other Soldiers in the unit and that type of behavior will not be tolerated in the Army, with an honorable discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted 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 an honorable discharge.  On 3 January 2007, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge.  The applicant was not transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR).

       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, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, however, a fully 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 issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit a change to the applicant's separation code, reenlistment code and the narrative reason for discharge.   There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incidents of unsatisfactory performance.  The analyst determined that the applicant’s separation (SPD) code, reentry eligibility (RE) code, and the narrative reason for discharge  was appropriate because the quality of the applicant's service was not consistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue and that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unsatisfactory Performance” and the separation (SPD) code is "JHJ," with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of  "3."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and the separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, to include the reentry eligibility code entered in block 27 will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the separation code, reentry eligibility code, and the narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 5 August 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA 
















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 separation (SPD) code, reentry eligibility (RE) code, and the narrative reason for 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 0
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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080017430
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages