Application Receipt Date: 060512
Prior Review Prior Review Date: None
I. Applicant Request
Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents.
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: NIF
Discharge Received: Date: 920115
Chapter: 13 AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance
RE: SPD: LHJ
Unit/Location: F Battery 2nd Bn 7th ADA 11th ADA Bde Fort Bliss, TX 79916
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF
Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
DOB: 690123
Current ENL Date: 880916 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 03 Mos, 01 Days ?????
Total Service: 03 Yrs, 03 Mos, 01 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 16T10 Patroit Missle Crewmember GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: SWA (900901-9104030)
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, SWASM w/2 BSS, ASR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record:
Current Address:
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant claims he has gone to college and completed course work enroute to receiving a Bachelor Degree in Business Management.
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The applicants record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army. However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicants signature. His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions and a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3." Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of LHJ (i.e., unsatisfactory performance). Evidence of record shows that on 9 January 1992, Orders 6-39, DA, HQ, U. S. Army Air Defense Artillery Center, Fort Bliss, Texas, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army and assigned him to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement), to complete his military obligation, effective date: 15 January 1992.
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 applicants available military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst recommend that the applicants characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of unsatisfactory performance. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicants characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. While the applicant's unsatisfactory performance is not condoned, the analyst found that the length of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, the time that has elasped since his discharge, and his post service accomplishments mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable.
VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing
Type of Hearing: Date: 21 March 2007
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 applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. However, the Board found that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.
Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner
X. Board Action Directed
No Change
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: None
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None
XI. Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority:
MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board
Official:
MARY E. SHAW DATE: 26 March 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20060006828
Applicant Name: Mr.
______________________________________________________________________
Page 5 of 5 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080019491
Applicant Name: ????? Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: Undated Discharge Received: Date: 951027 Chapter: "Invalid SPD Code"; however, the Commander's Recommendation Memorandum states "Chapter 13". By his unsatisfactory performance, the Applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080003702
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 11 May 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance for several APFT failures, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant waived his right to legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060002393
Application Receipt Date: 060214 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 08Mos, 23Days ????? The applicant's chain of command recommended approval for involuntary release from active duty and discharge from USAR Commission with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080017886
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 and documents submitted by the Applicant. The DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12c(2) by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12c by reason of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110023845
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 26 February 1998, 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 to military life, and for failing to achieve the minimum Army standards on the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT), with an uncharacterized discharge. Certification Signature Approval...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010845
Applicant Name: ????? By his unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of his 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: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014935
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 31 July 1996, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance (received a Company Grade Article 15 on (960522) for three specifications of FTR), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013552
Paragraph 5-17 specifically provides that a soldier may be separated for other physical or mental conditions not amounting to a disability under Army Regulation 635-40, which interferes with assignment to or performance of duty. 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: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070011782
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 10Mos, 13Days ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 23 November 1994, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance for failure of two consecutive Army Physical Fitness Test, with a honorable discharge. Regulations currently in effect list the narrative reason for separation as Physical Standards. Accordingly,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080019018
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of the Applicants available records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the Applicant's discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 provides in pertinent part, that a Soldier is in entry-level status for the first 180 days of continuous active duty. Furthermore, the analyst determined...