Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999015264
Original file (1999015264.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
PART II - APPLICATION DATA

(Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy)

1. Character of Discharge: GD

2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 900402

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 13, AR 635-200

          b. Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance
4. Prior review(s): NONE


PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

 1.       Service data: 2. Awards and decorations:
                            GCMDL(1)
a. Period entered for: 5 Years
b. Entry date: 890217
c. Age: 20 Years DOB: 680702
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 91 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E4
1 Year 1 Month 14 Days

4. Performance evaluations:
NONE

PART III - SERVICE HISTORY
SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued

5. Periods of unauthorized absence:

Status Inclusive dates
         AWOL 890920-890921

         Mil conf

         Civil conf

         Other


6. Nonjudicial punishment:

         Date     Offense(s)
         880913 AWOL (880907-880909)(summarized)
         890331 Disrespectful in language toward SGT (890327); AWOL (890926-890927)
         890725 Disrespectful in language toward SGT (890625)
         890929 AWOL (890920-890922)

7. Court-Martial data: NONE
         a. SCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

        
         b. SPCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

         c. GCM: 
                  Date Offense(s)


8.       Remarks: NONE
SECTION B - Prior 

Other discharge(s):

          Service   From      To        Type Discharge
         RA 860828 890216 HD



PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l. Facts and Circumstances:

         a. The evidence of record shows that on 20 March 1990, 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD). The applicant was advised of his rights, consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. On 21 March 1990, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a GD.

         b. On 2 April 1990, the applicant was discharged with a GD. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 1 year, 1 month, and 14 days of his current enlistment and a total of 3 years, 7 months and 3 days of active military service.

         c. The applicant’s record shows that he completed almost 4 years of service and the highest rank he achieved while on active duty was specialist/E-4. His disciplinary record includes his acceptance of four Article 15’s: the first, summarized, on 13 September 1988 for a two day AWOL; the second on 31 March 1989 for being disrespectful to a noncommissioned officer (NCO) and for being absent from his place of duty which resulted in a reduction to private/E-2; the third on 25 July 1989 for being disrespectful to an NCO; and the fourth on 29 September 1989 for a three day AWOL which resulted in his reduction to prviate/E-2. The applicant’s unit commander processed the applicant for separation by reason of unsatisfactory performance, citing the disciplinary record outlined above as the basis for taking the action.

2. Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action : 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.
SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS

 1. Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel.
As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293.
2. Exhibit(s) submitted:

         A-1: DD Form 293, dated 981112, with one (1) enclosure(s).
         A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE
         B-l: Other Documents: NONE

PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED)



SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion


Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor ( ) Legal Advisor



 a. Medical prehearing comments (if applicable):

b. Legal prehearing comments (if applicable):
PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING

SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits

1. Review/hearing information:

         a. Type requested:
         ( X ) Records review ( ) Hearing

         b. Type Held:
         ( X )Records review ( ) Hearing
         ( ) Tender Offer

         c. Review/hearing location and date: Washington D.C. on 3 March 1989.

         d. Appearance by:
         Applicant ( ) Yes ( X ) No
         Counsel ( ) Yes ( X ) No

          e. Applicant testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
         f. Counsel presentation: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
         g. Witness(es) testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
2. Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing:

PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS

1. a. Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity:

          ( X )   Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A of this case report and directive.
         ( )     Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as follows:
         ( )     Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as follows:
         b. Request: ( X ) Recharacterization ( ) Change of Reason


2. Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on issues of propriety and/or equity:


          a. Propriety:    The applicant has not submitted an issue of propriety and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an issue of propriety to change the discharge.
         b. Equity:       The parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI, Paragraph 1, above.

 (1) The issue is rejected. The Board noted the applicant’s desire to gain an upgrade to his discharge in order to gain employment with either the federal government or the police department. However, after carefully examining the applicant’s record for the enlistment under review, the Board concluded that the applicant’s desire to gain employment does not provide a basis on which to grant relief. The applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. Further, the applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.
3. Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s): NONE
PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote

1.       Board conclusion(s):

         The discharge was:

          ( X )    Proper.
         ( )      Improper as to characterization. Change characterization to                                      .
         ( )      Improper as to reason. Change reason to                         under                       .

         ( X )    Equitable.
         ( )      Inequitable as to characterization. Change characterization to                                .
         ( )      Inequitable as to reason. Change reason to                       
                  under                                  .
         ( )      Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should be changed to                      under                          .
2. Voting record: Change No Change
         Reason 0 5
Characterization 0 5

         The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address below. The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right corner of this document.

Department of the Army Review Boards Agency
ATTN: Promulgation Team
1941 Jefferson Davis Highway, 2nd Floor
Arlington, VA 22202-4508



3. Minority views: NONE

PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION B - Verification and Authentication

Case report reviewed and verified       

                                 
MR. ADRIANCE
Case Reviewing Official 


PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
SECTION A - DIRECTIVE
NONE
SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


THOMAS J. ALLEN
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
Review Board

Official:




SUZANNE WALKER
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder

EXHIBITS:
A - Application for review of discharge          C - Other
B - Material submitted by applicant

INDEX RECORD:

 AR Number: 1999015264 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 990303 A9445
Character of Service: GD A0100
Date of Discharge: 900402
Authority: AR 635-200 C13
Reason: A4900
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: NC 5-0 A













PART IX - VOTING RECORD

 Name  Reason Characterization
 CHANGE NC HON UHC NC UNCHAR
1.      Mbr      X          X    
2.      Mbr      X          X    
3.      Mbr      X          X    
4.      Mbr      X          X    
5.      Mbr      X          X    

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999023595

    Original file (1999023595.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MRS. WADE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:THOMAS J. ALLEN Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application for...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000050543

    Original file (2000050543.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 30 January 1989, the applicant was discharged. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:WILSON A. SHATZER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001059057

    Original file (2001059057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record shows that on 27 July 1989, 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 a general discharge. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000035994

    Original file (2000035994.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the Board presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. AR Number: 2000035994 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217 Date of Review: 000330 A0107 Character of Service: UD A9203 Date of Discharge: 890920 A9201 Authority: AR...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000047467

    Original file (2000047467.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:WILSON A. SHATZER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board AR Number: 2000047467...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001058505

    Original file (2001058505.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Prior review(s): NONE PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review 1. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service or description of separation no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The Board, being convinced...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000049969

    Original file (2000049969.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 11 May 1990, the applicant was discharged. Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:WILSON A. SHATZER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001062447

    Original file (2001062447.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief by changing the characterization of service to fully honorable. Remarks: This action entails a change to the SPD code to “ JTF .” SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:GERARD W. SCHWARTZ Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003098581

    Original file (AR2003098581.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Evidence of record shows that on 30 January 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 28 February 2003, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Minority...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003083891

    Original file (2003083891.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 26 July 1990, the applicant was discharged. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:SPURGEON A. MOORE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant