Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/06/10 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant 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: 040716 Chapter: 13 AR: 635-200 Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance RE: SPD: JHJ Unit/Location: Fort Hamilton Veterinary Section, Fort Hamilton, NJ 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: 18 Current ENL Date: 011002 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 09Mos, 15Days ????? Total Service: 2 Yrs, 09Mos, 15Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 91R10/Veterinary Food Inspection Specialist GT: 98 EDU: HS GRAD Overseas: Korea Combat: None Decorations/Awards: KDSM, NDSM, ASR, OSR, GWOTSM V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Jacksonville, FL Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence shows the applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to her discharge from the Army. The record indicates that Deparment of the Army, Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison Fort Monmouth, Fort Monmouth, NJ, Orders 191-1, dated 9 July 2004, discharged the applicant from the Army, effective 16 July 2004. 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, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, however, a fully 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, and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. On 16 July 2004 Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison Fort Monmouth, Fort Monmouth, NJ discharged the applicant under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. All the facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue, however, the narrative reason for separation is governed by specific directives. The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this Chapter is "Unsatisfactory Performance", and the separation code is "JHJ." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. Further, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.” If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact the local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes. Additionally, the analyst determined that the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) does not contain all of the documents from the separation packet. If the applicant desires to appear before a personal appearance Board, the burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action for the Board’s consideration. Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 1 April 2009 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) EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080009277 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages