Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY1998 | 1998012895
Original file (1998012895.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
PART II - APPLICATION DATA

(Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy)

1. Character of Discharge: UOHC

2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 910920

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 10, AR 635-200

          b. Reason: For The Good of The Service-In Lieu of Court-Martial
4. Prior review(s): NONE


PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

 1.       Service data: 2. Awards and decorations:
                            NDSM
a. Period entered for: 4 Years ASR
b. Entry date: 890824 SWASM
c. Age: 22 Years DOB: 670215
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 96 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E3
2 Years 0 Months 27 Days

4. Performance evaluations:
NONE

PART III - SERVICE HISTORY
SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued

5. Periods of unauthorized absence: NONE

 Status Inclusive dates
         AWOL

         Mil conf

         Civil conf

         Other


6. Nonjudicial punishment: NONE
         Date     Offense(s)
        


7. Court-Martial data: NONE
         a. SCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

        
         b. SPCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

         c. GCM: 
                  Date Offense(s)


8.       Remarks: NONE
SECTION B - Prior Service Data
NONE

Other discharge(s):

          Service   From      To        Type Discharge





PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l. Facts and Circumstances:

         a. The evidence of record shows that on 1 August 1991, the applicant was charged with wrongfully using cocaine between 20 May and 5 June 1991). On
19 August 1991, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter l0, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense. Further, the applicant stated that he understood that he could receive an under other than honorable conditions (UOHC) discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits. The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander recommended approval of a UOHC discharge. On 4 September 1991, the separation authority approved the discharge with a UOHC discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.

         b. On 20 September 1991, the applicant was discharged with a UOHC discharge. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 2 years and 27 days of active military service.

         c. The applicant’s record shows that he completed just over 2 years of service; attained the rank of private first class/E-3; and served in combat during Operation Desert Storm. There is no evidence of disciplinary infractions other than the offense for which he was ultimately discharged. A court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ based on his testing positive for cocaine on a unit urinalysis test. The applicant requested an administrative separation for the good of the service in order to avoid trial by court-martial and the punitive discharge he may have received.

2. Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The requests may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOHC is normally considered appropriate.
SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS


 1. Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel.
As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293.
2. Exhibit(s) submitted:
         A-1: DD Form 293, dated 981110, with two (2) enclosure(s).
         A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE
         B-l: Other Documents: NONE

PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED)



SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion


Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor ( ) Legal Advisor



 a. Medical prehearing comments (if applicable):

b. Legal prehearing comments (if applicable):
PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING

SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits

1. Review/hearing information:

         a. Type requested:
         ( X ) Records review ( ) Hearing

         b. Type Held:
         ( X )Records review ( ) Hearing
         ( ) Tender Offer

         c. Review/hearing location and date: Washington D.C. on 13 January 1999 .

         d. Appearance by:
         Applicant ( ) Yes ( X ) No
         Counsel ( ) Yes ( X ) No

          e. Applicant testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
         f. Counsel presentation: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
         g. Witness(es) testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
2. Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing:

PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS

1. a. Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity:

          ( X )   Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A of this case report and directive.
         ( )     Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as follows:
          ( X )   Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as follows:

Board Issue: (4) The characterization of service was too harsh.
         b. Request: ( X ) Recharacterization ( ) Change of Reason


2. Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on issues of propriety and/or equity:

          a. Propriety:    The applicant has not submitted an issue of propriety and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an issue of propriety to change the discharge.

          b. Equity:       The parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI, Paragraph 1, above.

 (4) The issue is accepted. There was a full consideration of all service including the infraction of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offense. The Board determined that the characterization of service discharge was inequitable because the quality of the applicant's service did not warrant the granting of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant's failure to perform in accordance with Army standards was mitigated by service of sufficient merit to warrant an upgrade of the discharge being reviewed. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.

(1), (2), and (3) The issues are rejected. The Board noted the applicant’s contentions that he was deserving of an honorable discharge because his discharge was based on one isolated incident; that he had served honorably during combat; and that his post service conduct had been good and he has remained drug free. However, the Board concluded that these factors do mitigate the applicant’s misconduct sufficiently to warrant relief beyond that already provided in response to issue (4) above. Further, the Board found that the applicant’s misconduct diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.
        

3. Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s): NONE

PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote

1.       Board conclusion(s):

         The discharge was:

          ( X )    Proper.
         ( )      Improper as to characterization. Change characterization to                                      .
         ( )      Improper as to reason. Change reason to                         under                       .

         ( )      Equitable.
         ( X )    Inequitable as to characterization. Change characterization to General, Under Honorable Conditions .
         ( )      Inequitable as to reason. Change reason to                       
                  under                                  .
         ( )      Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should be changed to                      under                          .
2. Voting record: Change No Change
         Reason 0 5
Characterization 5 0

         The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address below. The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right corner of this document.

Department of the Army Review Boards Agency
ATTN: Promulgation Team
1941 Jefferson Davis Highway, 2nd Floor
Arlington, VA 22202-4508



3. Minority views: NONE

PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION B - Verification and Authentication

Case report reviewed and verified       

                                 
MR. JOSEPH A. ADRIANCE
Case Reviewing Official 

PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
SECTION A – DIRECTIVE

TO: ARBA Support Division-St Louis Date: 15 January 1999

The Army Discharge Review Board, established under the provisions of Section 30, Public Law 346, 78th Congress, 22 June 1944 and codified as Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553, in the case of the applicant named in Part I directs that the ARBA Support Division-St Louis issue a new DD Form 2l4 to the applicant which reflects the following directed change(s):

 ( X )    Characterization of discharge be changed to General, Under Honorable Conditions.
( X )   Other (see remarks below).
Remarks: Restore the applicant’s grade to Private First Class/E-3.


SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


THOMAS J. ALLEN
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
Review Board

Official:




SUZANNE WALKER
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder

EXHIBITS:
A - Application for review of discharge          C - Other
B - Material submitted by applicant

INDEX RECORD:

 AR Number: 98012895 INDEX NUMBERS: A9208
Date of Review: 990113 A9222
Character of Service: UD A9236
Date of Discharge: 910920 A0100
Authority: AR 635-200
Reason: A7000
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: GD 5-0 A

PART IX - VOTING RECORD

 Name  Reason Characterization
 CHANGE NC HON UHC NC UNCHAR
1.      Mbr      X      X       

2.      Mbr      X      X       

3.      Mbr      X      X       

4.      Mbr      X      X       

5.      PO      X      X       





Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000045151

    Original file (2000045151.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:WILSON A. SHATZER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | AR1999016028

    Original file (AR1999016028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board noted the contentions of the applicant and his counsel, that due to the circumstances of the case the UOHC discharge was too harsh; and that based on the applicant’s overall record of service the UOHC discharge was inequitable. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 99031553

    Original file (99031553.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Board issue: (2) The narrative reason for discharge is inequitable.b. While the Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct, it determined that the characterization of service was inequitable because the applicant’s overall quality of service did not warrant the granting of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. ( X ) Change reason and authority for discharge to Misconduct, AR 635-200 .

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000039558

    Original file (2000039558.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 27 December 1996, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1998 | 1998012849

    Original file (1998012849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. ADRIANCE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999027214

    Original file (1999027214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. ADRIANCE Case Reviewing Official PART...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025029

    Original file (1999025029.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. PART VII -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999029168

    Original file (1999029168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. ADRIANCE Case Reviewing Official PART...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025368

    Original file (1999025368.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999017750

    Original file (1999017750.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data NONEOther discharge(s): ServiceFromToType Discharge PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEWSECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances:a. Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A-2: Counsel Issues:...