Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/11/24 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 149 submitted in lieu of 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: Undated Discharge Received: Date: 990515 Chapter: 13 AR: 635-200 Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance RE: SPD: JHJ Unit/Location: 214th Aviation CO, Unit # 29231, APO AE 09102 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: 18 Current ENL Date: 950125 Current ENL Term: 06 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 04 Yrs, 04 Mos, 06 Days ????? Total Service: 04 Yrs, 04 Mos, 06 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 67T UH-60 Hel Repr GT: 122 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany, Bosnia Combat: Bosnia (980410-981030) Decorations/Awards: NDSM, AFSM, ASR, OSR, NM, ASUA; AGCM (not annotated on the Applicant's DD Form 214) V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Yelm, WA Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant joined the VA ARNG and received an Honorable discharge (020930-030929). VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 9 March 1999, 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 been counseled for: notification of debt collection (990223), failure to pay a debt (981216), bar to reenlistment (981103), missing formation (981015), did not use chain of command (981022), dishonored checks and financial indebtedness (980831), failure to make payments on DPP account (980826), unsatisfactory performance, dishonored checks, and suspension of check cashing privileges (980805), not participating in barracks clean up (980722), improper maintenance procedures (980601) and unsatisfactory performance (980503), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The Applicant was advised of his rights, consulted with 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 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 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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of the Applicant’s military records and the issue submitted with the application, 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 the 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 service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service. The analyst acknowledges the Applicant's successful reenlistment into the Virginia Army National Guard; however, in review of the Applicant’s service record leading to his discharge, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. Therefore, the analyst determined 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: 4 September 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 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 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080019094 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages