Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 071109 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: See DD Form 293 submitted by the Applicant
II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?
Tender Offer: NA
See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits
III. Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 941003
Discharge Received: Date: 941031 Chapter: 13 AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance RE: SPD: JHJ Unit/Location: A Company, Medical Center Brigade, Fitzsimons Army Medical Center, Aurora, CO
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 940330, Assault on another soldier (940227), reduction to E2 (suspended), 14 days extra duty (CG)
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 21
Current ENL Date: 920102 Current ENL Term: 5 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 10Mos, 31Days ?????
Total Service: 02 Yrs, 10Mos, 31Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 71G10/Patient Administration Spec GT: 96 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR, NDSM, AAM
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: Tampa, FL
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 3 October 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 in that you received a Company Grade Article 15 for assault upon another soldier (940330), Delinquent Deferrred Payment Notice from AAFES (940418), fitness for duty evaluation (930722), inability to perform the duties (940607), harassing civilian personnel x 2 (940601), leaving her appointed place of duty (940601), and failure to take APFT and weigh-in (940425) with a general under honorable conditions discharge. She was advised of her rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did submit a statement in her 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 17 October 1994, 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 applicants military records and the issue she 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 applicants discharge was appropriate because the quality of her service was not consistent with the Armys standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. By her unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service. Furthermore, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Therefore, the analyst determined 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: 1 October 2008 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: NA
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: None
VIII. 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.
IX. Board Decision
XI. Certification Signature
Board Vote: Approval Authority:
Character - Change 0 No change 5
Reason - Change 0 No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: ?????
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20070016123
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 2 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008170
Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicants available records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue and document submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant contends she was being discharged for excessive absences from unit drills and this was a mistake because...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013551
Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 07 December 2004, 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, with a general discharge. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010230
Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. The regulation also permitted the characterization of service as under honorable conditions, but did not authorize the characterization of service as honorable. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090015967
Applicant Name: ????? 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080016100
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 12 March 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 failure of two consecutive record Army Physical Fitness Tests, with an honorable discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to:...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080014110
Applicant Name: ????? Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicants characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080014110 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013924
Applicant Name: ????? Legal Basis for Separation: National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel of the Army National Guard. An enlisted member separated for misconduct which includes unsatisfactory participation will normally be furnished a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions in accordance with Army Regulation 135-178. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful...
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 | AR20080019315
The unit I was in was a Drill Sergeant unit under the 95th Division. If the applicant desires to appear before a personal appearance Board, the burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Boards consideration.Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080002314
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 16 November 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-pattern of misconduct for conducting herself in a discreditable manner and in a manner prejudicial to good order and discipline, including conduct violating accepted standards of personal conduct found in the UCMJ, Army Regulations, the Civil Law, and time honored...