DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Army Discharge Review Board
1901 South Bell Street
Arlington, VA 22202-4508
24 June 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. Accordingly, your request for
a change in the character and/or reason of your discharge is denied.
You may reapply to the Army Discharge Review Board for a personal
appearance hearing and/or you may apply to the Army Board for Correction of
Military Records. Enclosed are the necessary applications for requesting a
review from both boards. If you choose to apply to the Army Board for
Correction of Military Records you must do so within three years from the
date of this letter.
Be advised that the Army Discharge Review Board operates on a 15-year
statute of limitations from the date of discharge; therefore, you must
reapply within this time frame for a hearing.
If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not
responsive to the issues raised, or does not otherwise agree with the
decisional document requirements of DoD Directive 1332.28, you may submit a
complaint in accordance with Enclosure 5 of that Directive. The complaint
procedure does not permit you to challenge the merits of the decision, but
is designed solely to ensure that the decisional document meets applicable
requirements for clarity and responsiveness. You may obtain a copy of DoD
Directive 1332.28 by writing to: Army Review Board Agency, Attention:
(Reading Room), The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20310-1809.
Sincerely,
Robert L. House
Colonel, U.S. Army
President
Enclosure
MILITARY REVIEW BOARDS
Case Report & Directive
PART I - IDENTIFICATION DATA
NAME: ADDRESS:
.
SSN: PHONE:
COUNSEL: ADDRESS:
PHONE:
ALTERNATE PERSON(S) TO BE NOTIFIED: ADDRESS:
RELATIONSHIP: PHONE:
TYPE REPORT:
( X ) Original
( ) Addendum
REMARKS
Case Management Data
( X ) Response to other correspondence required upon completion of case.
( ) DD Form 149 in file. Send case to ABCMR.
OSA FORM 172 (REVISED) 22 May 98 Cover Sheet
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): 900226
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:
ASR
a. Period entered for: 4 Years
b. Entry date: 881227
c. Age: 20 Years DOB: 680911
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
GT: 80 3. Highest grade
achieved:
f. Length of Service: E2
1 Year 2 Month(s) 0 Day(s)
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 900117-900122; 900130-900131
Mil conf
Civil conf
Other
6. Nonjudicial punishment:
Date Offense(s)
900202 AWOL (900117-900122) and (900130-900131) (Company Grade)
891010 Disrespect to a noncommissioned officer (Company Grade)
(not in file)
7. Court-Martial data: NONE
a. SCM:
Date Offense(s)
b. SPCM:
Date Offense(s)
c. GCM:
Date Offense(s)
8. Remarks: DD Form 214 does not reflect dates of lost time due to
AWOL.
SECTION B - Prior Service Data
NONE
Other discharge(s):
Service From To Type Discharge
PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW
SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l. Facts and Circumstances:
a. Evidence of record shows that on 12 February 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. The
unit commander indicated that he was initiating separation action because
the applicant wrote worthless checks; disrespected noncommissioned
officers; failed to repair on numerous occasions; and went AWOL. He was
advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was
advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a
statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended
separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.
On 14 February 1990, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative
efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a
characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
b. On 26 February 1990, the applicant was discharged. At the time
of discharge, the applicant had completed 1 year and 2 months of active
military service and accrued 7 days of lost time due to AWOL in the period
under review.
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, to include separation for those
individuals who fail to maintain Army physical standards. Initiation of
separation proceedings is required for individuals without medical
limitations who have two consecutive failures of the Army physical fitness
test or who are eliminated for cause from Noncommissioned Officer Education
System courses unless the responsible commander chooses to impose a bar to
reenlistment per AR 601-280. Service of individuals separated because of
unsatisfactory performance will be characterized as honorable or under
honorable conditions as warranted by their military records.
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 041011, with multiple 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 22 June
2005.
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.
(1-12) The issues are 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 incidents of unsatisfactory performance. The Board noted the
applicant’s contentions, however, the Board found a sufficient pattern of
unsatisfactory performance in his official record to warrant the separation
action under review. 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.
The Board was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were
met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the
separation process. Before initiating action to separate the applicant,
the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about the
deficiencies that could lead to separation. The Board noted that the
command made an assessment thereafter of the applicant's potential for
becoming a fully satisfactory soldier, and the command appropriately
determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further
military service. Although the applicant contends that the signature on
the counseling forms in his official record is forged, he failed to submit
sufficient evidence in support of this claim. Further, there is no
evidence to suggest that the Article 15 the applicant accepted on 2
February 1990 was not properly executed. Although the applicant’s prior
Article 15 (dated 891010) is not in the official record, the Board presumed
that the punishment did not include a reduction in grade. Indeed the
applicant’s grade is reflected numerous times in his counseling statements
after the first Article 15 as “private/E-2” and the applicant confirms this
with his own signature as “Charles Wilson PV2/E-2”. The Board found no
evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The Board was
satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the
rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation
process. 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
1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor
Arlington, VA 22202-4508
3. Minority views: NONE
PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION B - Verification and Authentication
Case report reviewed and verified
Ms. McKim-Spilker
Case Reviewing Official
PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
SECTION A - DIRECTIVE
NONE
SECTION B - CERTIFICATION
Approval Authority:
ROBERT L. HOUSE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
Review Board
Official:
ESMERALDA G. PROCTOR
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: 20040008645 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 050622 A9221
Character of Service: GD A0100
Date of Discharge: 900226
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. PO X X
ARMY | DRB | CY1997 | 199701617
900215: Applicant was discharged. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. CASE NO: AD97-01617 PART IX - VOTING RECORD Name Reason Characterization CHANGENCHONUHCNCUNCHAR 1.
ARMY | DRB | CY1997 | 199700363
Finally, the Board considered the applicant's entire record of service for the period under review; 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 this prior to requesting 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. CASE NO: AD97-00363 PART VII - BOARD...
ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999019231
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 review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant AR Number: 1999019231 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217 Date of Review: 990310 A0113 Character...
ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999029141
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 | CY2004 | AR20040003309
Evidence of record shows that on 2 October 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, under honorable conditions discharge. However, the Board found that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed...
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000045453
His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 7, Paragraph 7-17b, AR 635-200 by reason of fraudulent entry with a characterization of service of uncharacterized. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. WILLIAMS Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:WILSON A. SHATZER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army...
ARMY | DRB | CY1998 | 1998012709
( X ) Reason and authority for discharge be changed to Misconduct under Chapter 14, AR 635-200 . EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant AR Number: 98012709 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217 Date of Review: 990125 A9201 Character of Service: GD A9211 Date of Discharge: 900330 A9315 Authority: AR 635-200 C14 A0100 Reason: A6730 Results of Board Action/ Vote/Affirmation: MD 5-0 A Name Reason Characterization CHANGENCHONUHCNCUNCHAR 1.
ARMY | DRB | CY1997 | 199701612
891101: Applicant was discharged.2. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3. CASE NO: AD97-01612 PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MS. CHANDLER Case Analyst and Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE (X) NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION WILLIAM E. MATHEWS Colonel, U.S....
ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999033208
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 | CY2004 | AR2004106166
The separation authority directed that the applicant would be discharged from the United States Army and issued an Honorable discharge. However, an authority involved in the discharge process improperly changed the characterization of service and the applicant was improperly discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Remarks: This action entails a change to the RE code to “1.” SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel,...