Application Receipt Date: 060424 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See 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: 010907 Chapter: 13 AR: 635-200 Reason: Physical Standards RE: SPD: JFT Unit/Location: 0001AGHQS Personnel Services FC Fort Riley, KS 66442 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: 790910 Current ENL Date: 000928 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 11 Mos, 09Days ????? Total Service: 04 Yrs, 01 Mos, 03 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-970805-000927/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 75H10 Personnel Spec GT: 105 EDU: HS Transcript Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AGCM, 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 specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records. 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. His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 13, paragraph 13-2e by reason of physical standards, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code ofJFT (i.e., physical standards) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3". Evidence of record shows that on 5 September 2001, Orders 248-0006, DA, HQ, 24th Infantry Division (Mech), Fort Riley, Kansas, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date: 7 September 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 records for the period of enlistment under review, the analyst recommend that relief be denied in this case. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his 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 Government regularity in the discharge process is presumed. That DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 13, paragraph 13-2e, by reason of physical standards, with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3", and a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. 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 reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 070228 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 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: 070307 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060006019 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages