Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 2007/10/31 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The Applicant requested an Entry Level Separation due to the death of her father in May of 1997. She states a copy of her father's obituary would be mailed for the Board's consideration. 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 970207 Chapter: 4 AR: 635-200 Reason: Completion of Required Active Service RE: SPD: MBK Unit/Location: C Co, 4-13 IN TNG Bn, Fort Jackson, SC Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 25 Current ENL Date: IADT/961120 Current ENL Term: NIF Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 02Mos, 18Days ????? Total Service: 08 Yrs, 00Mos, 00Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR 961025-041026/NA (Concurrent Service) Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: 101 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Dallas, TX 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 circumstances as to her entry into active service for the purposes of initial active duty training. However, her DD Form 214 indicates that she was released from active duty training under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-200 by reason of completion of required active service, with service uncharacterized. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of MBK (i.e., completion of required active service). Following completion of basic training, the applicant was released from active duty, with an effective date of 7 February 1997, and transferred to the 81st RSC, Birmingham, Alabama. Further, the record shows that on 17 Dec 97, Orders 351-9, Department of the Army, HQ, DA, 81st Regional Support Command reassigned the applicant to the U.S. Army Control Group, St. Louis, MO with an effective date of 12 January 1998, to complete her statutory obligation. She was released from the USARCG on 26 October 2004. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 4 of that regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of individuals at completion of required service (i.e., expiration term of service). c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's available military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issue, and documents she submitted, the analyst recommend that relief be denied in this case. The evidence of record shows that the applicant, while in entry-level status, was released from active duty for training under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-200, by reason of completion of required active service, with service uncharacterized. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable, unless the Soldier is in entry-level status. A Soldier is in entry-level status for the first 180 days of continuous active duty. Army Regulation 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldier’s service will be uncharacterized when separated in entry-level status. For ARNG and USAR Soldiers ordered to IADT/ADT, entry-level status terminates 180 days after the beginning of training. In view of the aforementioned, the analyst determined that the applicant was in entry level status and that the reason for discharge and characterization of service were both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 9 September 2008 Location: Washington, D.C. 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 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 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) MARK E. COLLINS Issue a new DD Form 214 Colonel, U.S. Army Change Characterization to: President, Army Discharge Review Board Change Reason to: Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070015236 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 2 pages