Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010693
Original file (AR20070010693.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name: ?????

Application Receipt Date: 070801	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: Unable to maintain weight standards of U.S. Army.

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: 061221
Discharge Received:     Date: 070125   
Chapter: 13    AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance
RE:     SPD: JHJ
Unit/Location: 232nd Engr Co, 94th Engr Bn, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473  

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
Year/Month:  7706  
HOR City, State: Kapaa, HI
Current ENL Date: 040504    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 02  Yrs, 08 Mos, 22Days ?????
Total Service:  02  Yrs, 08 Mos, 22 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-2
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 21E10 Heavy Const Equip Operator   GT: 88   EDU: GED Cert   Overseas: GermanySouthwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (Dates NIF)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTEM, ICM,  GWOTSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 21 December 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 consistently being late to formations, failed to conform to Army standards, continues to be a disruptive influence in the unit, his conduct was prejudicial to good order and discipline, and displays no potential to succeed in the military, 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 discharge.  On 8 January 2007, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was not transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group. 

      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, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, however, a fully 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, the issues and document he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would warrant 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 were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.      

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 25 July 2008              
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 0    No change 5   - 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.























								        
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: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 31 July 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070010693
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 5 pages

Similar Decisions

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016231

    Original file (AR20060016231.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    It indicates he was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-27f, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "3." 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070014985

    Original file (AR20070014985.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 7 August 1998, 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 unwilling or unable to adjust to military life, lacks the motivation, self discipline, aptitude and desire to adjust to military life and has received numerous counseling and Article 15s, with an uncharacterized discharge. The...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060004813

    Original file (AR20060004813.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. On 12 August 1994, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070011738

    Original file (AR20070011738.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009805

    Original file (AR20070009805.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 16 July 1993, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070017649

    Original file (AR20070017649.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090011290

    Original file (AR20090011290.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. However, on 6 January 2009, Headquarters, 416th Theater Engineer Command, 108100 S. Frontage Rd, Darien, IL, Orders 09-006-00022, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date: 30 January 2009, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

  • 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 | 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 | CY2008 | AR20080006330

    Original file (AR20080006330.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 13 March 2008, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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.