Application Receipt Date: 060412 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 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: 050720 Discharge Received: Date: 050819 Chapter: 13 AR: 635-200 Reason: Physical Standards RE: SPD: JFT Unit/Location: Company A, 81st Brigade Troops Battalion, Fort Campbell, Kentucky 42223 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Statement dated (031004) indicates that the applicant received an Article 15 on (031003), for violation of Article 91 (Disrespect to an NCO), however there is no record of an Article 15 proceeding in the OMPF. Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 740415 Current ENL Date: Reenl/040818 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 00 Mos, 2 Days ????? Total Service: 6 Yrs, 1 Mos, 17 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-960624-980915/HD RA-010925-040817/HD Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 21B10, Combat Engineer GT: 83 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Afghanistan (020115-020715), Iraq/Kuwait (030301-040205) Decorations/Awards: ACM, ICM, ARCOM (2), GWOTSM, NDSM, AFEM, ASR, OSB (3) V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None were submited. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 20 July 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of physical standards (failure to pass the APFT on two occassions on (040400) and (050405)), with a general under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit statements in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. On 22 July 2005, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions. 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 for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to fully honorable. The analyst noted that the applicant was discharged for the sole reason of a failure to meet the minimum standards of the Army Physical Fitness Test. While the applicant's unsatisfactory performance is not condoned, the analyst determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. However, the narrative reason for separation was both proper and equitable. 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 characterization of service was too harsh and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. 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. John Zangas, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None 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 AR20060005361 Applicant Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages