Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 080201 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: "My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 87 months of service with no other adverse action."
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: 021120
Discharge Received: Date: 021217 Chapter: 13 AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance RE: SPD: JHJ Unit/Location: A Co, 701st Maint Spt Bn, APO AE 09031
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 020903, Failure to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty x 4 (020418, 020723, 020724, 020725, 020726), failure to pay just debt being indebted in the sum of $3555.00 for rent from 020331-020729; Reduction to E4, extra duty for 45 days, suspended (FG).
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 34
Current ENL Date: 010627 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05 Mos, 10 Days ?????
Total Service: 07 Yrs, 02 Mos, 16 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 951002-980128/HD
RA 980129-991212/HD
RA 991213-010626/HD
Highest Grade: E5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 77F Petroleum Supply Spec GT: 95 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Korea, Germany Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, AGCM x2, NDSM x2, ASR, OSR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: Hope Mills, NC
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed by the Applicant.
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 20 November 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 for having received a Field Grade Article 15 on 3 September 2002 for multiple failures to report and having been counseled numerous other times for misconduct, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The Applicant was advised of her rights, waived counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. On 21 November 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the Applicant be discharged with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The Applicant was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group until she completed her statutory service obligation.
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. 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: 14 November 2008 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: NA
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: NA
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: No Change
Other: No Change
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20080002093
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 2 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090005317
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 analyst noted that the applicant was discharged for the sole reason of a failure to meet the minimum standards of the Army Physical Fitness Test and that the unit commander recommended 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 | CY2009 | AR20090002798
Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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. This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070018541
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 review of all the applicants available records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080005514
Applicant Name: ????? On 18 May 2006, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080012651
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting documents submitted by the applicant. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 14 December 2003, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 600-8-24, by reason of unacceptable conduct for misrepresenting another officer's work as her own during CAS3 course, for submitting a false record of a APFT, for failing to take...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080018937
Applicant Name: ????? The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Hardship Dependency", and the separation code is "KDB." 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 Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080005497
Applicant Name: ????? 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. 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:...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090009835
Applicant Name: ????? On 5 October 1999, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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 | CY2008 | AR20080004803
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 29 Janurary 2008, 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 his APFT in May 2007, failed to pay debt with Military star card (070901), failed to be at his appointed place of duty x 2 ( 071103 and 071105), with a general under honorable conditions discharge. By the...
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.