Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080014684
Original file (AR20080014684.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/09/17	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: 960923
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 961004   Chapter: 13-2a      AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance	   RE:     SPD: JHJ   Unit/Location: A Co, 143rd OD Bn, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 960117    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 08Mos, 18Days ?????
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 08Mos, 18Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 109   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Oregon City, OR
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 23 September 1996, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, Paragraph 13-2a, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance for failure of three consecutive Army Physical Fitness Tests, with an honorable discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  The applicant waived 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.  On 23 September 1996, 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 Individual Ready Reserve (IRR).
       

       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.  If in an entry level status the characterization of service will be uncharacterized.   

       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 issue she submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to fully honorable.  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.  The analyst also noted the lack of any other derogatory information in the record.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.
       
       Furthermore, regulations currently in effect list the reason for the applicant’s discharge as physical standards.  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." 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 2 July 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 characterization of service is too harsh and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board noted that the applicant was discharged for the sole reason of a failure to meet the minimum standards of the Army Physical Fitness Test.  The Board also noted the lack of any other derogatory information in the record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  

Furthermore, regulations currently in effect list the reason for the applicant’s discharge as physical standards.  Accordingly, the Board voted to change the narrative reason for separation on the DD Form 214 to current standards "Physical Standards" with the corresponding separation code of "JFT."  










 
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 3    No change 2
Reason -     Change 3    No change 2
(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: Current Standards "Physical Standards" with the corresponding separation code (SPD) of "JFT" under provision of Chapter 13, AR 635-200.
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080014684
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080007511

    Original file (AR20080007511.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. 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 characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable based on the length of the applicant’s his...

  • 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 | CY2009 | AR20090012263

    Original file (AR20090012263.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 17 May 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 failing two consecutive physical fitness test (060117 and 060418), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the narrative reason for separation on the DD Form 214 be changed to current...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090004930

    Original file (AR20090004930.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    I do not feel that difficulty maintaining my run time at the end of my military career should characterize all of my time in the military as anything less than honorable. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 9 July 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080005839

    Original file (AR20080005839.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 13 February 2001, 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 pass five consecutive record APFTs, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unsatisfactory Performance ", and the separation code...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080009413

    Original file (AR20080009413.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 "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: Physical Standards with the corresponding Separation Code of 'JFT'.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013581

    Original file (AR20070013581.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2009 | AR20090005317

    Original file (AR20090005317.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | AR20090009674

    Original file (AR20090009674.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 26 September 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 two consecutive failures of the Army physical fitness test with a honorable conditions discharge. Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the narrative reason for separation on the DD Form 214 be changed to "Physical Standards"...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008530

    Original file (AR20060008530.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 02 Mos, 23 Days ????? Accordingly, the analyst recommend that the narrative reason for separation on the DD Form 214 be changed to "physical standards" with the corresponding separation code of "JFT." 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 characterization...