Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2008/09/10 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: See DD Form 293 and four supporting 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: 080306
Discharge Received: Date: 080417 Chapter: 13 AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation RE: SPD: JHJ Unit/Location: C Co, 212th CSC, Ft Campbell, KY
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 071002, failed to obey an order or regulation, 7 days extra duty, oral reprimand (Summarized)
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 22
Current ENL Date: 070622 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 09Mos, 26Days ?????
Total Service: 02 Yrs, 10Mos, 22Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 050526-070621/HD
Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 68X10/Mental Health Spc GT: 111 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (060313-070312)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, OSR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: Las Vegas, NV
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 6 March 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 his failure to pass the Army Physical Fitness Test on two occasions (071107 and 071205), for being dismissed from the Warrior Leaders Course for disciplinary reasons, and for his lack of motivation, with an honorable discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 21 March 2008, the applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his 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 4 April 2008, 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 for the period of enlistment under review, the issue and supporting documents he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to fully honorable. There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incidents of unsatisfactory performance. The analyst does not condone the applicants unsatisfactory performance, however, determined that the characterization of service is now inequitable. The analyst found that the applicants unsatisfactory performance was mitigated by his overall service of sufficient length and quality as demonstrated by his earned awards and by the recommendations of several officers who had firsthand knowledge of his performance, and by his service in combat for one year. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicants characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.
VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing
Type of Hearing: Date: 12 June 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 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 1 No change 4
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: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20080014110
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 2 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080005094
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 12 December 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 to qualify with his assigned rifle, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. By the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service....
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013724
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 | CY2009 | AR20090006382
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 | 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 | CY2008 | AR20080003709
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 26 May 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 being repeatedly counseled for being failing to be at or late to his appointed place of duty, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070011400
Applicant Name: ????? Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. That DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080018967
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 18 March 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 having received a Company Grade Article 15 on 21 July 1995 for two specifications of FTR and for disobeying a direct order from a NCO and for having been counseled numerous times for various other offenses, with a general under...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013581
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 06Mos, 03Days ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 26 August 2003, 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 APFT failure on more than two occasions and for not showing progress after being entered in the weight control program on 13 August 2002, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. ...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010698
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 21 June 2006, 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 AWOL (060326-060327), drunk and disorderly (060324), failure to report (060209), and left his appointed place of duty (060201), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant waived legal counsel, was...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010405
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 14 December 1993, 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 a Summarized Article 15 (930728) for disrespecting and disobeying a noncommissioned officer; a Company Grade Article 15 (931004), for FTR and disobeying a noncommissioned officer; being charged (931125) by the Kaisserslautern Military...