Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011583
Original file (AR20080011583.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/07/24	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed 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: 960404
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 960520   Chapter: 13       AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance	   RE:     SPD: JHJ   Unit/Location: D Co, 2-29th IN Bn, Fort Benning, GA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 950807, AWOL from (950724-950728), reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $524 x 1 (both suspended), and 45 days extra duty (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 920902    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 08Mos, 19Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 08Mos, 19Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92Y10 Unit Supply Spec   GT: 101   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Mobile, AL
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states that she is a nurse and working to obtain a BS in nursing.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 8 April 1996, 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 her inability to conform to military standards, 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 not submit a statement in her own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  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 (IRR).
       
       The applicant's record contains an approved Bar to Reenlistment dated 13 September 1995. 

       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 discharge, under honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate, but an 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 and the issues 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 applicant’s 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 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 noted the aplicant's issue and determined that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.  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. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 8 May 2009         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 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: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080011583
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 2 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013131

    Original file (AR20070013131.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. While the applicant's specific facts for which she may have received a general discharge are not contained in the available record, the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include her two combat deployments and the lack of any evidence of misconduct as her DD Form 214 indicates she was discharged as an E-4 mitigated the possible discrediting entry. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080018494

    Original file (AR20080018494.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 1 May 2002, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 12C(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct for testing positive for cocaine on 010122 and 020107 urinalysis, AWOL from 000908-000912; and a pattern of misconduct consisting of failure to repair and disobeying an order, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. ...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080015274

    Original file (AR20080015274.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 13 December 1995, 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 her lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010082

    Original file (AR20060010082.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 14 October 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l3, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance (despite numerous counselings, both written and verbal, she continue to show lack of respect to both commissioned and noncommissioned officers, she repeatedly failed to follow instruction from supervisors and accept responsibility for her actions),...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080014684

    Original file (AR20080014684.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the narrative reason for separation on the DD Form 214 be changed to current standards "Physical Standards" with the corresponding separation code of "JFT." Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: Current Standards "Physical Standards" with the corresponding separation code (SPD) of "JFT" under provision of Chapter 13, AR 635-200.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100014296

    Original file (AR20100014296.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, "I received a Chapter 5, AR 635-200, and Chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance with characterization of service, General under Honorable, for being unable to pass the physical fitness test. 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:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090006382

    Original file (AR20090006382.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 1 April 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 to meet the minimum standards on two consecutive record Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) (061031) and (070509), the characterization of service is not in the file. The analyst noted that on the applicant's DD Form 214 block 24, "Character of...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013724

    Original file (AR20080013724.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. 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: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010080

    Original file (AR20060010080.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 2 June 2004, 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 (failure to adapt), with an uncharacterized discharge. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080016802

    Original file (AR20080016802.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 15 September 1998, 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 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...