Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060006378
Original file (AR20060006378.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
Application Receipt Date: 060504	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?  
Yes    No        Tender Offer:   ?????

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Original Character of Discharge
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge:    Date: 051216
Discharge Received:     Date: 060210   
Chapter: 13    AR: 635-200
Reason: Physical Standards
RE:     SPD: JFT
Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, Operations Group, Joint Multinational Readiness Center, APO AE (Germany) 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  811217  
Current ENL Date: 021120    Current ENL Term: 06 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 02Mos, 21Days ?????
Total Service:  03 Yrs, 02Mos, 21Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 25V10 (Combat Documentation Specialist)   GT: 112   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 16 December 2005, 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-failure of three consecutive army physical fitness test (APFT), with a characterization of service of honorable.  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.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 19 January 2006, 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.  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 discharge, under honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate, but an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.
      
      
      
      
      

      c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
      After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to fully honorable.  The analyst noted that the applicant was discharged for the sole reason of a failure to meet the minimum standards of the Army Physical Fitness Test.  The analyst also noted the lack of any other derogatory information in the record.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result, it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant's characterization of service be upgraded to honorable.  However, the analyst found the reason for discharge both proper and equitable.  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 070228              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




VIII.  Board Decision
The discharge was:			Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The characterization of service was:   Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The narrative reasons were: 	       	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

DRB voting record:  		      	Change     No change    (Character)
		 			       	Change     No change    (Reason)
					      (Board member names available upon request)

IX.  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 characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  The Board determined that the applicant's overall lengh and quality of service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  The Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it.

















Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

ROBERT L. HOUSE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 070307
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060006378

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000877

    Original file (AR20090000877.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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. 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090004326

    Original file (AR20090004326.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Chapter 10 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. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070011419

    Original file (AR20070011419.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Applicant Name: ????? The separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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 applicant was not properly notified as to the reasons why he would not get an...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010074

    Original file (AR20060010074.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05Mos, 00Days ????? On 13 October 2004, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 20 July 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100001012

    Original file (AR20100001012.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 11, AR 635-200, by reason of entry level performance and conduct for failure to adapt or will not adapt socially or emotionally to military life, with an uncharacterized discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070018755

    Original file (AR20070018755.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The regulation also directs that commanders will not take action prescribed in this chapter in lieu of disciplinary action; requires that the diagnosis concludes the disorder is so severe that the Soldier’s ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired; and states that separation for personality disorder is not appropriate when separation is warranted under chapter 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, or 15; Army Regulation 604-10 or Army Regulation...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060007740

    Original file (AR20060007740.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 02Mos, 15Days ????? Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: E5 XI.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070018892

    Original file (AR20070018892.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The analyst determined that no such unusual circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and her service did not warrant an honorable discharge. 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090001037

    Original file (AR20090001037.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? By the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080005921

    Original file (AR20080005921.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 11 July 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of an under other than honorable conditions. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...