Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999030655
Original file (1999030655.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
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): 880603

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 14, AR 635-200

          b. Reason: Misconduct-Drug Abuse
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: 870903
c. Age: 17 Years DOB: 691020
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 93 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E2
0 Year(s) 9 Month(s) 1 Day(s)

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:

         Date     Offense(s)
         880427   Wrongfully use some amount of marijuana, on or about (880306 to 880316)

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. 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—drug abuse, with a general discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his 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. On 20 May 1988, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general discharge.

         b. On 3 June 1988, the applicant was discharged with a general discharge.
At the time of discharge, the applicant had 9 months, and 1 day service on his current enlistment.

         c. The unit commander indicated that his specific reasons for initiating the applicant’s discharge were the following: positive urinalysis on 19 April 1988 and 16 March 1988; and, a field grade Article 15 for violation of Article 112a, UCMJ.

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 990811, with one (1) enclosure.
         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, DC on 15 September 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: (14) The narrative reason for discharge is inequitable.

         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.

 (14) The issue is accepted. Regulations currently in effect list the reason for the applicant’s discharge as misconduct. Accordingly, the Board voted to change the narrative reason on the DD Form 214 to misconduct. The Board was satisfied that the characterization of service was proper and equitable, and voted not to change it.

 (1) and (4) The issues are rejected. The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review. The Board congratulates him on his successful accomplishments since departing the Army. However, good post service conduct alone is not normally a basis upon which the ADRB grants relief.

(2), (3), (5), and (6) The issues are rejected. Even though the applicant claims that his offenses were minor and isolated, the Board concluded that the discrediting entries constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of soldiers in the Army. The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a soldier. The applicant, as a soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.
(7) The issue is rejected. The Board noted that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. The Board further found no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

 (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13) The issues are rejected. The Board noted the applicant’s contentions that his performance of duty was impaired by his deprived background, personal problems, use of alcohol, and psychiatric problems. Before initiating action to separate the applicant, the command ensured the applicant received appropriate legal counsel and that he was given proper mental and physical evaluations by competent medical authorities. He was also provided an opportunity to submit written statements explaining any


mitigating circumstances in his own behalf, which he waived after consultation with legal counsel. The applicant did not indicate that he was suffering from a psychiatric condition at the time of separation, nor did he provide any evidence to indicate that his ability to serve was impaired by personal problems, a deprived background, or use of alcohol. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was separated for illegal use of drugs on two occasions. As the applicant did not conform to required standards of acceptable conduct, the command appropriately determined that the applicant should be separated for misconduct.

3. Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s):

 The Army Discharge Review Board cannot change the applicant’s reentry eligibility (also known as the reenlistment) (RE) code. To obtain a change in an RE code, the applicant should provide supporting documentation to justify any change and submit the request to the Commander, US Army PERSCOM, ATTN: TAPC-EPR-P, 2461 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22331-0450. To obtain a waiver for reenlistment, the applicant should contact a local Army recruiter for assistance.


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.
         ( )      Inequitable as to characterization. Change characterization to                                .
         ( X )    Inequitable as to reason. Change reason to Misconduct
                  under AR 635-200 .
         ( )      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 5 0
Characterization 1 4

         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       

                                 
Ms. McKim-Spilker
Case Reviewing Official 

PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

 TO: ARBA Support Division-St Louis Date: 17 September 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 )   Change reason and authority for discharge to
        Misconduct , under AR 635-200.


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: 1999030655 INDEX NUMBERS: A9442
Date of Review: 990915 A9301
Character of Service: GD A9305
Date of Discharge: 880603 A9309
Authority: AR 635-200 C14 A9323
Reason: A6770 A0100
Results of Board Action/ A9221
Vote/Affirmation: MD 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 | 1999025668

    Original file (1999025668.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 | 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 | CY1999 | 1999024914

    Original file (1999024914.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED) Records requests are not in the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board; however, we are directing, in Part VIII of this document, that the applicant be provided proper procedures for requested copies of his military records. AR Number: 1999024914 INDEX NUMBERS: A0154 Date of Review: 990428 A9218 Character of Service: GD A0100 Date of Discharge: 881117 Authority: AR 635-200 C9 Reason:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1998 | 1998012781

    Original file (1998012781.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action : Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:THOMAS J. ALLEN Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999017936

    Original file (1999017936.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the Board found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.3. 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 - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:THOMAS J. ALLEN Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000044959

    Original file (2000044959.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 May 1988, the applicant was discharged. However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the Board found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999024996

    Original file (1999024996.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 MR. ADRIANCE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:THOMAS J. ALLEN Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board AR Number: 1999024996...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 99031572

    Original file (99031572.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived personal appearance before an administrative separation board and did not submit a statement on his behalf. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000042886

    Original file (2000042886.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Evidence of record shows that on 25 July 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, with a general discharge. Voting record: ChangeNo Change Reason 5 0 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. AR Number: 2000042886 INDEX NUMBERS: A9442 Date of Review: 000712...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000045797

    Original file (2000045797.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Prior review(s): NONE PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review 1. The applicant acknowledged notification, consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit 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 directive.