Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016056
Original file (AR20060016056.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Application Receipt Date: 061116	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
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?  
Yes    No        Tender Offer:        

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Original Character of Discharge
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: NIF   Date: NA
Discharge Received: GD    Date: 050329   
Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:  RE-3   SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: Headquarters, USA Training Center and Fort Jackson, Fort Jackson SC

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF, correspondence between applicant's chain of command speaks about pending Article 15, and the applicant indicated she received a company grade Article 15, but there is no record in the file.

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier's Overall Record
DOB:  810606  
Current ENL Date: 040912    Current ENL Term: 4 Years       
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 02Mos, 01Days      
Total Service:  01 Yrs, 02Mos, 01ays      
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: NIF   EDU: 15 years   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record:
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The applicant's complete facts and circumstances that led to the applicant's separation from the army are not part of the available records; however the record contain a properly constituted DD form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).  Her DD Form 214 indicates that she was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12b by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JKA (i.e., pattern of misconduct), this document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumes government regulatory in the discharge process.  The evidence of record further shows that the correspondence between the applicant's chain of command recommends the applicant for an administrative discharge but does not specify the type of characterization of the discharge. On 24 March 2005, the intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge proposal and recommended approval of the Chapter 14 discharge.  On 24 March 2005, the separation authority directed that the applicant's case be processed through administrative procedures as opposed to processing her case through medical disabilities channels.  The evidence of record shows that on 28 March 2005, Orders 087-1200, DA, HQ, US Army Training Center and Fort Jackson, Fort Jackson SC, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date: 29 March 2005.  

      b. Legal Basis for Separation:  
      Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed.  Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.

      c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
After a careful review of all the applicant's military records, and the issue she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  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 her misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  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: Records Review	Date: 4 December 2007              
Location: Wash DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: YES

VIII.  Board Decision
The discharge was:			Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The characterization of service was:   Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The narrative reasons were: 	       	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

DRB voting record:  		      Change          No change         - Character
		 			      Change          No change         - Reason
					      (Board member names available upon request)

IX.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
     

Case report reviewed and verified by: Gloria Blake, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to:      
Other:      
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade:      

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE:      
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060016056

Applicant Name:  Mr.         
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080009855

    Original file (AR20080009855.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: NIF Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 071126 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Pattern of Misconduct RE: SPD: JKA Unit/Location: A Co, 120th AG Bn, Fort Jackson, SC Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. The evidence of record shows that the applicant, while in entry-level status, was discharge from the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009956

    Original file (AR20070009956.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. A medical proceeding, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within six months of the Soldier’s initial entrance on active duty, that the condition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry into the military service had it been...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060007404

    Original file (AR20060007404.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 February 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 15, AR 635-200, by reason of homosexual admission, with an uncharacterized discharge. The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070018892

    Original file (AR20070018892.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The analyst determined that no such unusual circumstances were present in the applicant’s record and her service did not warrant an honorable 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 | CY2007 | AR20070010707

    Original file (AR20070010707.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 02Mos, 04Days Based on the enlistment records and the period of AWOL the applicant's DD Form 214 Item 12c "Net Active Service this period incorrectly reads as: years 00, months 01, and days 25, 12c should read as : years 00, months 02, and days 04. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010923

    Original file (AR20070010923.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her DD Form 214 indicates that she was released from active duty training under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-200 by reason of completion of period of active duty training, with service uncharacterized. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 does not indicate a Separation Code. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable, unless the Soldier is in entry-level status.

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070002285

    Original file (AR20070002285.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293. This document identifies the Army Regulation governing the separation of enlisted members from the United States Army Reserve and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 24 September 2007 Lieutenant Colonel,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070002285aC071031

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293. This document identifies the Army Regulation governing the separation of enlisted members from the United States Army Reserve and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s available record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060011660

    Original file (AR20060011660.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record shows that the applicant, while in entry-level status, was released from active duty for training under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-200, by reason of completion of required active service, with service uncharacterized. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable, unless the Soldier is in entry-level status. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010080

    Original file (AR20060010080.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 2 June 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 11, AR 635-200, by reason of entry level performance and conduct (failure to adapt), with an uncharacterized 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...