Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 071116
Prior Review Prior Review Date: None
I. Applicant Request
Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: See DD Form 293 and documents submitted by the applicant.
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: 970828
Discharge Received: Date: 981124
Chapter: 4-2A AR: 600-8-24
Reason: Substandard Performance
RE: SPD: JHK
Unit/Location: D Co, 1-14 Avn Regt, Fort Rucker, AL
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Year/Month: 5405
HOR City, State: Anderson, IN
Current ENL Date: 841219 Current ENL Term: INDEF Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 13 Yrs, 11Mos, 06Days ?????
Total Service: 15 Yrs, 7Mos, 16Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 931019-941218/HD
Highest Grade: CW3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 152FC AH-64 Pilot GT: NA EDU: Associate Overseas: Germany, Korea, SWA Combat: SWA (910420-911002)
Decorations/Awards: AM-2, ARCOM-2, AAM-2, JMUA, AGCM, NDSM, KLM, HSM, ASR, OSR, SAAB
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 25 June 1998, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 600-8-24, by reason of substandard performance of duty. The applicant was directed to show cause for his retention in the Army for failing to achieve satisfactory progress after enrollment in the Army Weight Control Program. He was advised that he could submit a voluntary resignation in lieu of elimination or submit a rebuttal and request an appearance before a Board of Inquiry. On 29 April 1998, the applicant appeared, with counsel, before a Board of Inquiry (Show Cause Board). The Board found that the applicant had failed to achieve satisfactory progress IAW AR 600-9 Army Weight Control Program. The Board recommended separation with a honorable discharge. The Ad Hoc Review Board recommended that the applicants elimination be accepted with issuance of a honorable discharge. On 6 October 1998, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of honorable.
The file contains an Ad Hoc Officer Elimination Case for CW3 Paul D. Swanson, dated 6 October 1998.
b. Legal Basis for Separation:
Army Regulation 600-8-24 sets forth the basic authority for Officer Transfers and Discharges. Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security.
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:
After a careful review of the entire applicants military records, the issues, and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst determined that the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant a change in the reason for discharge under review. The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4, Paragraph 4-2a, AR 600-8-24. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is Substandard Performance", and the separation code is "JHK." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. Therefore, 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: 080905
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: Proper Improper
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 applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the narrative reason for 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: NA
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: 080907
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20070016595
______________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 5 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007810
Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Substandard Performance and the separation code is "JHK."
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090005366
On 8 October 2008, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board, and directed that the applicant be discharged from the U.S. Army with a characterization of service of fully honorable. The evidence of record shows that the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Chapter 4, Paragraph 4-2a, AR 600-8-24, by reason of substandard performance, with a characterization of service of fully...
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120006070
Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: NA Date: NA Discharge Received: Date: 110319 Chapter: 4-2a AR: 600-8-24 Reason: Substandard Performance RE: SPD: JHK Unit/Location: C Co, Troop Command, Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Germany Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080004710
Further the Ad Hoc Review Board reviewed the elimination action because of substandard performance of duty in accordance with AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2a(4) and forwarded the elimination action to the Department of the Army, Office of the Assistant Secretary Manpower and Reserve Affairs for approval. The evidence of record shows that the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards), reviewed the elimination action and determined that the applicant would be separated with an...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090006383
Applicant Name: ????? Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Based on this evidence the Board found that the applicants misconduct was mitigated by the circumstances surrounding her discharge, that being, the applicant had requested a hardship discharge due to a family situation.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070017675
Applicant Name: ????? c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After careful review of all the applicant's military records for the term of service under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit a change to the narrative reason for discharge on the applicant's DD Form 214. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the term of service under...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130015918
IN THE CASE OF: Ms. BOARD DATE: 23 June 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20130015918 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. The Department of the Army Ad Hoc Review...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100014555
Applicant Name: ????? On 15 March 2010, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The applicants discharge was appropriate because the quality of her service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by Army Officers.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009811
The applicant was directed to show cause for substandard duty performance and misconduct. The board recommended that the applicant be issued an honorable discharge. (5), and (11) by reason of substandard performance with an honorable characterization of service.
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130004196
The evidence of record shows that on 19 November 2010, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2a(16), due to substandard performance of duty for failure to establish an adequate Family Care Plan in accordance with AR 600-20, Paragraph 5-5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 25 February 2011, with a characterization of service of honorable, under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, paragraph...