Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110011236
Original file (AR20110011236.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/05/23	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant's states, in effect, that she is requesting an upgrade of her discharge so that she can be eligible for the Post 9/11 GI Bill.

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: 110406
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 110503   Chapter: 13       AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance	   RE:     SPD: JHJ   Unit/Location: F Company, 309th Military Intelligence Battalion, Fort Huachuca, AZ 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 110314, with intent to deceive, altered an official document (DD Form 689) (110121), forfeiture of $342.00 pay, extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 100804    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  34 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	0 Yrs, 9 Mos, 0 Days ?????
Total Service:  		0 Yrs, 9 Mos, 0 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 89   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 6 April 2011, 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 she was determined to be unqualified for further military service and she was unable to adapt to the military environment.  The unit commander recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  
       
       On 6 April 2011, 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 Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.   
       
       On 7 April 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation 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 applicant’s military records and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which 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 the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue that she is requesting an upgrade of her discharge so that she can be eligible for the Post 9/11 GI Bill.  However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.
       
       Therefore, 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: 30 November 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 20 May 2011.













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: No Change										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change

Official:




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder




















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 AR20110011236
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100023003

    Original file (AR20100023003.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 16 September 2009, 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 record Army Physical Fitness Tests with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110004795

    Original file (AR20110004795.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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 which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The analyst determined no such unusual circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and the applicant's service did not warrant an honorable discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100012672

    Original file (AR20100012672.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The DD Form 214 indicates 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. The DD Form 214 indicates 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 | CY2009 | AR20090016108

    Original file (AR20090016108.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 separation is warranted under Chapter 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, or 15; Army Regulation 604-10 or Army Regulation 635-40. The narrative...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110021528

    Original file (AR20110021528.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 8 April 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013557

    Original file (AR20080013557.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Service of soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance for failure of the Army Physical Fitness Test will be characterized as honorable or general, under honorable conditions. By the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100022924

    Original file (AR20100022924.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The unit commander recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions 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 recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110016150

    Original file (AR20110016150.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NA Discharge Received: Date: 051117 Chapter: 4 AR: 635-200 Reason: Completion of Required Active Service RE: SPD: MBK Unit/Location: Company D, 795TH Military Police Battalion, T/TC, Fort Leonard Wood, MO Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of MBK (i.e., completion...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110024216

    Original file (AR20110024216.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 13 October 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct, abuse of illegal drugs, for wrongfully using marijuana (100827 - 100926), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because his quality of...

  • 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...