Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999026473
Original file (1999026473.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
PART II - APPLICATION DATA

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

1. Character of Discharge: GD

2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 880601

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 14, AR 635-200

          b. Reason: Misconduct-Commission of a Serious Offense
4. Prior review(s): NONE


PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

 1.       Service data: 2. Awards and decorations:
                            ASR
a. Period entered for: 4 Years
b. Entry date: 871006
c. Age: 23 Years DOB: 631120
d. Educational level: GED
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 104 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E2
0 Years 7 Months 26 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 19 May 1988, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of
Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense, with a recommendation for a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD). The applicant was advised of his rights, consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. On 23 May 1988, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a GD.

         b. On 1 June 1988, the applicant was discharged with a GD. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 7 months and 26 days of active military service.

         c. The applicant’s record shows that he completed under a year of service and never advanced beyond the rank of private/E-2. There are no documented acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition contained in the record. The applicant was processed for separation based on the commission of a serious offense for communicating a threat to kill. The record of counseling contained in the record indicates that the applicant went to extreme measures to be separated from the service, to include communicating a threat to kill and to poison food in the dining facility. The evidence of record supports that the applicant’s separation was not begun as an initiative of the command, but rather was advanced by the applicant himself.

2. Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action : Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter l4 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, 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.
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 990309, with two (2) enclosure(s).
         A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE
         B-l: Other Documents: NONE
         C-1: DD Form 149, dated 990309.

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 23 June 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:
         ( )     Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as follows:
         b. Request: ( X ) Recharacterization ( X ) 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.

 (1), (2), (3), and (4) The issues are rejected. The Board noted the applicant’s contentions that, in effect, he had suffered a back injury which impaired his ability to serve which the command failed to recognize; that he was disappointed in the chain of command because they attempted to make him do things that he was physically unable to do; that his command abused its authority in giving him a bad discharge; and that he was not properly counseled on the impact of his discharge at the time. However, after carefully examining the applicant’s record of service for the period of enlistment under review, the Board determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated his misconduct. The Board determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief for his medical problem, without committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The Board was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Before initiating action to separate the applicant, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about the deficiencies which could lead to separation. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.
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                       .

         ( X )    Equitable.
         ( )      Inequitable as to characterization. Change characterization to                                .
         ( )      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 0 5

         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. ADRIANCE
Case Reviewing Official 

PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
SECTION A - DIRECTIVE
NONE
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: 1999026473 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 990623 A9321
Character of Service: GD A9329
Date of Discharge: 880601 A9411
Authority: AR 635-200 C14 A0100
Reason: A6730
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: NC 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 | CY1999 | AR1999024449

    Original file (AR1999024449.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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 VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004103381

    Original file (AR2004103381.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 30 August 2001, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002067126

    Original file (2002067126.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 23 November 1988, 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 Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003083841

    Original file (2003083841.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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. Change characterization to Honorable . EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003097113

    Original file (AR2003097113.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION SECTION A - DIRECTIVE TO: ARBA Support Division-St Louis Date: 16 August 2004 The Army Discharge Review Board,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999028266

    Original file (1999028266.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 MRS. WADE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000049957

    Original file (2000049957.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditions discharge and submitted a statement in his own behalf. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004101004

    Original file (AR2004101004.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge RA 990309 021009 Honorable PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. On 14 February 2003, the intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general discharge. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003097140

    Original file (AR2003097140.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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. On 19 November 2002, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000038990

    Original file (2000038990.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 MRS. WADE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B -...