Application Receipt Date: 060217 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents. 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: 011204 Chapter: 13 AR: 635-200 Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance RE: SPD: JHJ Unit/Location: Headquarters Company, USA Maneuver Center, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 780624 Current ENL Date: 991119 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 00 Mos, 16 Days ????? Total Service: 02 Yrs, 00 Mos, 16 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 75F10 Pers Info Sys Mgt Spec GT: 103 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: 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 applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to her discharge from the Army. 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. Her DD Form 214 indicates that she was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance with a characterization of service of honorable and a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3." Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JHJ (i.e., unsatisfactory performance.) Evidence of record shows that on 16 November 2001, Orders 320-0367, DA, United States Army Maneuver Center, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date: 4 December 2001. 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 available military records, the issue and documents she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit a change to the narrative reason for discharge. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to her discharge from the Army. However, the applicant’s 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. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. That DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13 AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of honorable. Barring evidence to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Therefore, the analyst determined that the narrative reason for discharge remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 070110 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 No change (Character) Change No change (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 narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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: None Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 070112 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060002483 Applicant Name: Ms. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages