MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 23 September 1998
DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-10124A
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.
Member
The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.
The Board considered the following evidence:
Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
advisory opinion, if any)
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: He makes no statement.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicants military records show:
He had prior service in the Army National Guard. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 April 1994.
On 8 February 1996, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 5 - 7 February 1996.
On 6 March 1996, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for failing to go to his appointed place of duty.
On 8 May 1996, the applicant completed a mental status evaluation and was found to be mentally capable of understanding and participating in proceedings and psychiatrically cleared for administrative action.
On 5 June 1996, the commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200 for pattern of misconduct, citing the applicants two Article 15s and several counseling statements for indebtedness and lying about his mothers illness. He recommended the applicant receive a general discharge. His intermediate commanders also recommended separation with a general discharge.
The applicant acknowledged the separation action. He requested consulting counsel. He did not submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 11 June 1996, the applicant was confined by civil authorities for an unknown offense and released on 21 June 1996.
On an unknown date, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed the applicant receive a general discharge. This approval is not on file.
On 10 July 1996, the applicant was discharged, with a general discharge, in pay grade E-2, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14 for misconduct. He had completed a total of 2 years, 6 months and 27 days of creditable active service and had 12 days of lost time.
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, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.
On 27 August 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicants request for an upgraded discharge.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations it is concluded:
1. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.
2. The applicants administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations. Considering his numerous, though relatively minor, infractions of military discipline, the characterization of his discharge as general was and still is appropriate.
3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
GRANT
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
Loren G. Harrell
Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710124
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 5 June 1996, the commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200 for pattern of misconduct, citing the applicant’s two Article 15s and several counseling statements for indebtedness and lying about his mother’s illness. On an unknown date, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019792
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The evidence of record and the provides no indication the applicant suffered from a physically or mentally disqualifying condition that would have supported his separation processing through the Army PDES at the time of his separation, and he has failed to provide independent evidence showing he suffered from a disqualifying medical condition at the time of his discharge. The evidence of record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073317C070403
On 15 August 1996, the applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation. He was given an RE code of 4. There is no evidence of Government error in this case; the applicant was given the correct RE code of 4 at the time based upon his reason for separation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710853
On 8 January 1997, the commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14 for pattern of misconduct. On 7 February 1997, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade of E-3, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14 for misconduct. In pertinent part, it states that unit commanders will take action to advance soldiers other than private E-1s on an individual basis.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710101C070209
On 20 October 1989, the commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14 for misconduct. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement. The applicant received an Article 15 for each of the two times he tested positive for cocaine during urinalysis testing.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067231C070402
On 23 November 1998, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1 under the provisions of Army Regulations 635-200, chapter 14-12B, for misconduct, with an under honorable conditions discharge (General). The evidence of record shows that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of service determination at the time of discharge was not consistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. Carl W. S....
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9706507C070209
On 2 August 1988, the applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation. On 31 August 1988, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant receive a general discharge under honorable conditions. The applicant was discharged on 8 September 1988, in the pay grade E-1, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, for misconduct - abuse of illegal drugs, and was given a general discharge under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710101
On 20 October 1989, the commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14 for misconduct. He requested his case be considered by a board of officers, he wanted to make a personal appearance before such a board, and wanted representation by counsel before such a board. The applicant received an Article 15 for each of the two times he tested positive for cocaine during urinalysis testing.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062935C070421
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 20 March 1985, the applicant’s company commander initiated discharge proceedings under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, acts or patterns of misconduct.
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120002785
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 12 January 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductcommission of a serious offense for failing to report to his appointed place of duty on divers occasions between (090710 and 090716)' wrongfully using marijuana (100414), and absent without leave (AWOL) (100714-101025), with a...