Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014935
Original file (AR20060014935.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Application Receipt Date: 061020	

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: 960731
Discharge Received:     Date: 960830   
Chapter: 13    AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance
RE:     SPD: LHJ
Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 555th Combat Engineer Group, Fort Lewis, WA 98433 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 960522/Failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty X 3, on or about (960228, 960315, and 960425)/(Company Grade). 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  730923  
Current ENL Date: 950824    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 00Mos, 07Days ?????
Total Service:  04 Yrs, 05Mos, 06Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-920325-950823/HD
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31U10 (Signal Support System Specialist)   GT: 121   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany, Southwest Asia   Combat: Kuwait (930730-931206)
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, SWASM (w/1 bronze service star), ASR, OSR, KLM
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  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.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, 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 9 August 1996, 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, and the issue he submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s 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 incidents of unsatisfactory performance.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  While the applicant's incidents of unsatisfactory performance are not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length of the applicant's service to include his combat service, and the time that has elapsed since his discharge 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: 7 November 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 2    No change 3   - Character
		 			      Change 0    No change 5   - 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 discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted to deny relief.

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: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 20 November 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060014935

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 4 pages

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2006 | AR20060011656

    Original file (AR20060011656.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 00 Mos, 13 Days ????? 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 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance (he was counseled for failing the APFT from 15 May 1998 to 10 December 1998, failure to follow instructions, disobeying on two occasions, late for formation on two occasions, failure to repair on six occasions, counseled...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060009225

    Original file (AR20060009225.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 l3, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance (his very disturbing behavior, disregard for noncommissioned officers, and fighting his fellow Soldiers on more than one occasion), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully...

  • 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 | 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 | CY2006 | AR20060006828

    Original file (AR20060006828.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of LHJ (i.e., unsatisfactory performance). 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:...