Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003091628
Original file (2003091628.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PART II - APPLICATION DATA

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

1. Character of Discharge: General, Under Honorable Conditions

2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 980814

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 8, NGR 600-200

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


PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

 1.       Service data: 2. Awards and decorations:
                            ARCOM
a. Period entered for: 3 Years AAM
b. Entry date: 960607 NDSM
c. Age: 22 Years DOB: 730704 ASR
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 100 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E4
2 Years 2 Months 8 Days

4. Performance evaluations:
NONE

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

5. Periods of unauthorized absence: NONE

 Status Inclusive dates
         AWOL

         Mil conf

         Civil conf

         Other


6. Nonjudicial punishment: NONE
         Date     Offense(s)
        


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 Service Data


 Other discharge(s):

          Service   From      To        Type Discharge
         USAR     910625   920610   NA
         ADT      920611   921112   Uncharacterized
         USAR     921113   930106   NA
         RA       930107   960606   Honorable



PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

         a. The evidence of record shows that the applicant received notification of his unexcused absences on three separate occasions (i.e., 23 May 1998, 30 April 1998, and 3 March 1998) and failed to contact his unit. On 22 May 1998, as a result of the applicant’s twelve (12) unexcused absences, the unit commander initiated the applicant’s separation under the provisions of Paragraph 8-24f, Chapter 8, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Having received no response from the applicant, the unit commander, on 25 July 1998 recommended separation of the applicant. The intermediate commanders reviewed the unit commander’s recommendation and recommended approval of the applicant’s separation action. On 12 August 1998, Departments of the Army and the Air Force, Office of the Adjutant General of Virginia, Virginia National Guard, Richmond, Virginia, Orders 224-030 discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard, effective 14 August 1998 and assigned him to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training), St Louis, Missouri for the remainder of his obligation. The record contains a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service). It indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-24f, Chapter 8, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

         b. On 14 August 1998, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 2 years, 2 months, and 8 days of military service in the period under review and had 7 years, 1 month, and 21 days of total military service.

2. Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action : National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-91 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army National Guard. Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the State Army Reserve National Guard. Paragraph 8-27(f) of that regulation provides in pertinent part that individuals can be separated for being an unsatisfactory participant. Army Regulation 135-91 states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills occur during a 1 year period.
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 030605, with 8 enclosures.
         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, DC on 18 February 2004 .

         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 ( X ) 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 carefully examined the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review. There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses. The Board noted the applicant’s contentions and the documents submitted in support of his request for upgrade; however, the Board did not find said contentions sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. Further, the Board determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without becoming an unsatisfactory participant. The Board concluded that 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. By his poor duty performance, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. 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 2 3

         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. RIVERA
Case Reviewing Official 

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

Approval Authority:


SPURGEON A. MOORE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
Review Board

Official:




MARY E. SHAW
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: 2003091628 INDEX NUMBERS: A9235
Date of Review: 040204 A9217
Character of Service: GD A9309
Date of Discharge: 980814 A0113
Authority: NGR 600-200 C8
Reason: A8400
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: NC 3-2 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.      PO      X          X    






Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004105221

    Original file (AR2004105221.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-27f, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions, and a Reenlistment Eligibility Code of RE3. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged from the Oklahoma Army National Guard and the Reserve of the Army under the provisions of Paragraph 8-27f, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participant with a...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000041253

    Original file (2000041253.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    His NGB Form 22 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 7, Paragraph 7-10r, NGR 600-200 by reason of unsatisfactory participation with a characterization of service of general. The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003096535

    Original file (AR2003096535.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    It indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-26k, Chapter 8, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Army Regulation 135-91 states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills occur during a 1 year period. However, the Board directs that the applicant’s discharge order from the Reserve of the Army be changed...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000045741

    Original file (2000045741.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE C-1: DD Form 149, dated 000703. 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:WILSON A. SHATZER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003091442

    Original file (AR2003091442.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge USAR 880715 881231 NA PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. His NGB Form 22 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8-27g, NGR 600-200, as an unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004106634

    Original file (AR2004106634.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    All the facts and circumstances are not in the available record; however, the Board determined that sufficient information is in the record to show that the applicant was properly discharged from the State of New York Army National Guard due to his unsatisfactory participation with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003095106

    Original file (AR2003095106.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 February 2000, as a result of the applicant’s unexcused absences and having received no response from the applicant, the unit commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Chapter 8, Paragraph 8-26k, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-26k, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003096759

    Original file (AR2003096759.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-26k, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Army Regulation 135-91 states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills occur during a 1 year period. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003098700

    Original file (AR2003098700.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, NGR 600-200, by reason of misconduct-unsatisfactory participation, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Remarks: This action entails a restoration of grade to E2 and a change to the applicant’s discharge from the Reserve of the Army to reflect a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: ROBERT L....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | AR20050003234

    Original file (AR20050003234.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Army Discharge Review Board 1901 South Bell Street Arlington, VA 22202-4508 21 October 2005 Office of the President After careful review of your application, military records and all other available evidence, the Army Discharge Review Board determined that you were properly and equitably discharged. 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. Minority views:...