Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060009224
Original file (AR20060009224.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
Application Receipt Date: 060627	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See 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: 050602
Discharge Received:     Date: 050729   
Chapter: 13    AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performnce
RE:     SPD: JHJ
Unit/Location: Company C, 1st Engineer Bn, Fort Riley, KS 66442-5000 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050126-disrespectful in language toward a SGT, (041208), (Company Grade).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  831211  
Current ENL Date: 021015    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 02  Yrs, 09 Mos, 15 Days ?????
Total Service:  02  Yrs, 09 Mos, 15 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 21B10 Combat Engineer   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Letter   Overseas: South West Asia   Combat: Iraq (030907-040929)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant claims he was accepted in the Spartan School of Aeronautics effective August 2006.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 2 June 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 (he disrespected noncommissioned officers, failed to obey orders numerous times, and failure to report to appointed place of duty), 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 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  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 applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review and the issues he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incidents of unsatisfactory performance.  The analyst determined 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 unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service.  Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable.  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 30 May 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 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 inequitable.  The Board does not condone the applicant's unsatisfactory  performance; however, found that the overall length of the applicant's service; to include his combat service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge mitigated the discrediting entries 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.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, 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: 12 June 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060009224

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010082

    Original file (AR20060010082.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 14 October 2004, 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 (despite numerous counselings, both written and verbal, she continue to show lack of respect to both commissioned and noncommissioned officers, she repeatedly failed to follow instruction from supervisors and accept responsibility for her actions),...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008530

    Original file (AR20060008530.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 02 Mos, 23 Days ????? Accordingly, the analyst recommend that the narrative reason for separation on the DD Form 214 be changed to "physical standards" with the corresponding separation code of "JFT." 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014935

    Original file (AR20060014935.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2007 | AR20070011400

    Original file (AR20070011400.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. That DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008228

    Original file (AR20060008228.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 02 Mos, 23 Days ????? Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. 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, while the Board does not condone the applicant’s unsatisfactory performance, it determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010698

    Original file (AR20070010698.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 21 June 2006, 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 AWOL (060326-060327), drunk and disorderly (060324), failure to report (060209), and left his appointed place of duty (060201), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant waived legal counsel, was...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010405

    Original file (AR20070010405.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 14 December 1993, 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 receiving a Summarized Article 15 (930728) for disrespecting and disobeying a noncommissioned officer; a Company Grade Article 15 (931004), for FTR and disobeying a noncommissioned officer; being charged (931125) by the Kaisserslautern Military...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010370

    Original file (AR20060010370.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2006 | AR20060009423

    Original file (AR20060009423.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 11 Mos, 23 Days ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 11 September 2002, 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 (failed two consecutive record Army Physical Fitness Tests on 8 July 2002 and 9 August 2002), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Discussion, Determination, and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013581

    Original file (AR20070013581.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 06Mos, 03Days ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 26 August 2003, 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 APFT failure on more than two occasions and for not showing progress after being entered in the weight control program on 13 August 2002, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. ...