Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080008129
Original file (AR20080008129.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:   

Application Receipt Date: 2008/05/16	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents 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: 000628
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 000918   Chapter: 13       AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance	   RE:     SPD: JHJ   Unit/Location: HHC 244TH Quartermaster BN, Fort Lee, VA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 000323, wrongful use of marijuana on or before 3 January 2000 detected from a urine sample which you submitted on the same day; a violation of Article 112a, UCMJ; forfeiture of $502.00, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated on or about 21 May 2000; Extra duty for 45 days. (FG)?????

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  29
Current ENL Date: 980820    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 00Mos, 29Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 00Mos, 29Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 71L10/Administrative Specialist   GT: 108   EDU: HS GRAD   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Adamsville, AL
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed












VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 28 June 2000, 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, for over the past 15 months you failed to become a productive Soldier as evidenced by your continuous failure to follow directives, 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 submitted a statement in her own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  On 11 August 2000, 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 Individual Ready Reserve.

       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 and the issue submitted with the application, 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 applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of the service was not consistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service.  Furthermore, the record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Additionally, 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: 6 March 2009         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

VIII.  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.  
        
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
X.  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 AR20080008129
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100013912

    Original file (AR20100013912.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 2 April 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 11, AR 635-200, by reason of entry level performance and conduct for being unable to meet the minimum standards for successful completion of Basic Combat Training due to his inability to adapt to the military environment, his refusal to train, and his stating that he no longer wanted to be in the Army, with an...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013564

    Original file (AR20070013564.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 April 2007, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070012949

    Original file (AR20070012949.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 May 2003, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of fully honorable. The regulation also directs that commanders will not take action prescribed in this chapter in lieu of disciplinary action; requires that the diagnosis concludes the disorder is so severe that the Soldier’s ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired; and states that separation for personality disorder is not appropriate when...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011957

    Original file (AR20080011957.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel) provides for the separation of enlisted personnel of the Army Reserve and Army National Guard. Also, regarding the applicant's issue in reference to him reenlisting in the United States Army Reserve, the analyst found that at the time of discharge the applicant was issued an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100012315

    Original file (AR20100012315.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 6, paragraph 6-3a, AR 635-200, by reason of hardship with an uncharacterized separation of service. 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 Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015821

    Original file (AR20060015821.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090006442

    Original file (AR20090006442.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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. 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 | AR20080016867

    Original file (AR20080016867.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 20 June 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 failing to pass the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: Physical Standards" with the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080015018

    Original file (AR20080015018.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 29 May 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 receiving numerous negative counseling statements for discipline, failing to report for duty and military performance; the applicant also received a company grade Article 15, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080007921

    Original file (AR20080007921.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 28 September 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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records...