Application Receipt Date: 060609
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: 961217
Discharge Received: Date: 961227
Chapter: 13 AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance
RE: SPD: JHJ
Unit/Location: Battery B 3rd Bn 29th FA 3RD BCT Fort Carson, CO 80913
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
DOB: 691208
Current ENL Date: 951005 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 02 Mos, 23 Days ?????
Total Service: 03 Yrs, 11Mos, 22 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-930106-951004/HD
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 92Y10 Supply Spec GT: 98 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AGCM, NDSM, ASR, ALP
V. Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record:
Current Address:
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant served in the Indiana Army National Guard, he received numerous awards and was honorably discharged from the National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army.
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 20 June 2000, 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 (consecutive record failures of the Army Physical Fitness Test and failure to qualify on the M-16 range), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. On 18 December 1996, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.
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 military records during the period of enlistment under review and the issue he submitted, the analyst recommends 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 the incidents 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 overall length and quality of the applicant's service, the time that has elapsed 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 remains both proper and equitable.
VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing
Type of Hearing: Date: 20 June 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 5 No change 0 - Character
Change 0 No change 5 - 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, while the Board does not condone the applicants unsatisfactory performance, it determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. The Board found the circumstances surrounding his discharge; his post service accomplishments, and the time that has elapsed since his discharge mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. However, 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: 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: 28 June 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20060008228
Applicant Name: Mr.
______________________________________________________________________
Page 5 of 5 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010370
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 20 February 1995, 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 (receiving two Article 15's, several counseling statements for failing to report to duty on time and leaving her appointed place of duty and dereliction of duty), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009661
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 31 May 1994, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 8, NGR 600-200, paragraph 8-260 (5), by reason of unsatisfactory performance for failure of two consecutive Army Physical Fitness Tests (APFT) (931107) and 940514), with an honorable discharge. Army Regulation 135-178 provides for the separation of members of the Army National Guard and Army Reserve when it is...
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 | AR20060009813
Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 13 December 1991, 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 for being AWOL three days, (24 June 1991), received another Company Grade Article 15 for failing to be at his appointed place of duty (3 December 1991), he...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060012039
Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 8 Mos, 6 Days The net active service this period on the applicant's DD Form 214, item 12c is incorrect, the applicant has a period of AWOL, and civil confinement, that is not shown on the DD Form 214, item 29, time lost. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicants military records, and the issue he submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicants characterization of service be upgraded to...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013362
Applicant Name: ????? The regulation provided that the separation authority could disapprove the commanders recommendation for discharge for misconduct and direct disposition by other means, disapprove the recommendation for separation for misconduct and direct separation for unsatisfactory performance, or convene a board of officers to determine whether the service member should be separated for misconduct. The regulation also permitted the characterization of service as under honorable...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060009226
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 9 Mos, 8 Days ????? c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicants military records, the issues and independent documents she submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable...
AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015433
The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant's characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. 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...
AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015409
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 2 April 1992, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-for receiving two Field Grade article 15s for wrongful use of marijuana, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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. ...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014814
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 applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts recommendation and...