Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/07/16	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: Applicant states in effect the reason for discharge is inaccurate. Applicant further states that the current narrative reason for separation is leaving him disadvantaged in seeking employment opportunities.

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: 070319
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 071010   Chapter: 4-2a and 4-24a(1)       AR: 600-8-24
Reason: Substandard Performance	   RE:     SPD: BHK   Unit/Location: Vanderbilt University Army ROTC, Nashville, TN 

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:  33
Current ENL Date: 061120    Current ENL Term: ?? Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	0 Yrs, 10Mos, 21Days ?????
Total Service:  		9 Yrs, 1Mos, 14Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 920808-960328/HD
                                       RA 960329-970703/HD
                                       USAR 980205-001120/HD
                                       USAR 030121-060019/HD 
Highest Grade: O1		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 00E Student Officer   GT: NIF   EDU: College Degree   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAMx4, AGCM, NDSM, NCOPDR, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Nashville, TN
Post Service Accomplishments: None provided by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 9 July 2007, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2a(16), AR 600-8-24, by reason of substandard performance of duty for his failure to establish an adequate family care plan.  The applicant was directed to show cause for retention in the Army.  On 2 August 2007, the applicant submitted his resignation in lieu of elimination proceedings. On 19 March 2007, his command recommended involuntary separation from active duty under the provisions of paragraph 4-2a(16), AR 600-8-24.  The Army Ad Hoc Review Board recommended that the applicant’s request for resignation in lieu of elimination action be accepted with issuance of an honorable discharge.  
       The Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of honorable.  

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 600-8-24 sets forth the basic authority for officer transfers and discharges.  Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for eliminating an officer from the Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security.  AR 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and  the issue, and documents he submitted, the analyst determined that the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant a change in the reason of the discharge under review.
       
       The applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by Army Officers.   The applicant provided no corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. 
        
       The applicant contends that his reason for discharge is inaccurate and that it is leaving him disadvantaged when seeking employment opportunities.  However, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2a and 4-24a(1), AR 600-8-24, by reason of substandard performance with an honorable discharge.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Substandard Performance” and the separation code is "BHK."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  Further, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 24 May 2010         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, DD Form 214, Show Cause Elimination Letters, DA Form 4187, Letter of Recommendation, Counseling Statement.

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


















Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090012507
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages