Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 070711
Prior Review Prior Review Date: None
I. Applicant Request
Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: "I am attending school to better myself & my education. I would like my GI bill funding so I can help asst. with school."
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: Date: NIF
Discharge Received: Date: 060620
Chapter: 14-12A AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Minor Infractions)
RE: SPD: JKN
Unit/Location: USAINSCOM, HQ, 513th MI Bde, Fort Gordon, GA
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051206, Failure to go to appointed place of duty (051128); Extra duty and restriction for 10 days (CG).
Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Year/Month: 82/10
HOR City, State: Miami, FL
Current ENL Date: 051106 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 07 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Total Service: 03 Yrs, 03 Mos, 16 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 030305-051105/HD
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 92G Food Service Operations GT: 89 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (041118-051108)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, Iraq Campaign Medal, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed.
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 31 May 2006, the unit commander notified the Applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductfor displaying a pattern of misconduct consisting of serious disciplinary infractions, for having received Article 15s for positive urinalysis (040624) and failure to report (051206), 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 submitted a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general under honorable conditions discharge. On 9 June 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the Applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions.
The record contains a Military Police report dated 9 January 2006.
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, however, a general under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:
After a careful review of all the Applicants military records, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The Applicants 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 military personnel. By his misconduct, the Applicant diminished the quality of his 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 Applicants 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: Date: 27 August 2008
Location: Washington, D.C.
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: NA
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: NA
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 2 No change 3 - Character
Change 0 No change 5 - Reason
(Board member names available upon request)
IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the Applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.
X. Board Action Directed
No Change
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA
XI. Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority:
MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board
Official:
CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 27 August 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20070009643
______________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 4 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009643
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 07 Mos, 11 Days ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 31 May 2006, the unit commander notified the Applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductfor displaying a pattern of misconduct consisting of serious disciplinary infractions, for having received Article 15s for positive urinalysis (040624) and failure to report (051206), with a general under honorable...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013363
On 22 May 2006, the Applicant consulted with legal counsel and requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board. On 10 August 2006, the separation authority approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed that the Applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. While the Applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst noted that the overall length and quality of the Applicant's...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070001878
Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 11 Mos, 28 Days ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 21 September 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070001878aC071031
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 13 February 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense (for disrespect toward an NCO and illegal use of marijuana), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014938
On 10 January 2006, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's available military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant's characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions. While the applicant's misconduct...
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120020994
Applicant Name: ????? On 27 April 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The analyst noted the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070002288aC071031
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 intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were:...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070002288
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 intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were:...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070017714
Applicant Name: ????? The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080009283
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 22 September 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, Section II, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductin the he was found guilty of multiple offenses of Sodomy and Sexual Abuse, with an other than honorable conditions discharge. On 6 March 2006 the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an...