Application Receipt Date: 060407	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See DD-293, with attachments.

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: 940203
Discharge Received:     Date: 940216   
Chapter: 13    AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance
RE:     SPD: LHJ
Unit/Location: Company B, 724th (Main) Support Battalion, Fort Stewart, GA 31314 

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:  710406  
Current ENL Date: Reenl/930625    Current ENL Term: 2 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 7 Mos, 19 Days ?????
Total Service:  4 Yrs,  1 Mos, 6 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-900111-930624/HD
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 63S10, Heavy-Wheel Vehicle Mechanic   GT: 100   EDU: 11 years   Overseas: Germany, Southwest Asia   Combat: Saudia-Arabia, Kuwait-910104-910504
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, ASR, KLM, NDSM, OSR, SWASM w/ 3 BSS
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None were submitted.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 3 February 1994, 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 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 did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit and intermediate commanders subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  On 7 February 1994, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with an Honorable 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, the issues and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst found that the narrative reason for discharge was inequitable and noted that the applicant was discharged for the sole reason of a failure to meet the minimum standards of the Army Physical Fitness Test.  Regulations currently in effect list the reason for the applicant’s discharge as “Physical Standards.”  Accordingly, it is recommended that the Board vote to change the narrative reason on the DD Form 214 to “Physical Standards” with a corresponding separation code of “LFT.”  
      

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 14 February 2007              
Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: N/A




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 separation is 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 to "Physical Standards,” with a corresponding separation code of “LFT.” 























Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. John Zangas, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: "Physical Standards," with a corresponding separation code of “LFT.” 
Other: None
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: 16 February 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060005270

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages