Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 99031516
Original file (99031516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
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): 940331

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 14, AR 635-200

          b. Reason: Misconduct
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: 2 Years 20 wks ASR
b. Entry date: 920805
c. Age: 18 Years DOB: 730907
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 103 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E2
1 Year(s) 7 Month(s) 26 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)
         940118 Wrongfully appropriated a Deawoo Tico, of a value of more than $100.00, (931029)

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 15 February 1994, 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant acknowledged notification, consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and did not submit a statement on his behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 22 March 1994, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

         b. On 31 March 1994, the applicant was discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. At the time of discharge, the applicant had
1 year, 7 months, and 26 days service on his current enlistment.

         c. The unit commander indicated that his specific reasons for initiating the applicant’s discharge was the following: wrongfully appropriating a Daewoo Tico (an automobile), of a value of more than $100, the property of a Korean national.

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 990907, with one (1) 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, DC on 27 October 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 ( ) 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) The issue is rejected. The issue is not a matter on which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion relating to the discharge process nor is it associated with the discharge at the time of issuance. Furthermore, eligibility for veteran’s benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of serious misconduct. The Board concluded that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because his misconduct was not consistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct by military personnel. By his misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of s service below that meriting a fully honorable or general discharge. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command’s action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct. 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       

                                 
Ms. McKim-Spilker
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: 1999031516 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 991027 A0100
Character of Service: UD A9500
Date of Discharge: 940331
Authority: AR 635-200 C14
Reason: A6730
Vote/Affirmation: NC 5-0 A













PART IX - VOTING RECORD



 Name  Reason Characterization
 CHANGE NC HON UHC NC UNCHAR

1.      Mbr      X          X    

2. COL COOLEY, HOWARD   Mbr      X          X    

3.      Mbr      X          X    

4.      Mbr      X          X    

5.      PO      X          X    





Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR20040001376

    Original file (AR20040001376.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Evidence of record shows that on 3 March 1994, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003083836

    Original file (2003083836.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 9 September 1994, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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 TO: ARBA Support Division-St Louis Date: 6 June 2003 The Army Discharge Review Board, established under the provisions of Section...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001054268

    Original file (2001054268.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. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:GERARD W. SCHWARTZ Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003097322

    Original file (AR2003097322.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 22 May 2001, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. On 13 May 2001, the applicant was discharged. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RON WILLIAMS Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION SECTION A - DIRECTIVE TO: ARBA...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000047441

    Original file (2000047441.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. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999024580

    Original file (1999024580.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. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant AR Number: 1999024580 INDEX NUMBERS: A9235 Date of Review: 990421 A9217 Character of Service: UD A9221 Date of...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000048652

    Original file (2000048652.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 26 August 1994, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of her case by an administrative separation board contingent upon her receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditions discharge and submitted a statement in her 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | AR20050003765

    Original file (AR20050003765.doc) 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. 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: 21 October 2005 The Army Discharge Review Board, established under the provisions...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1997 | 199700608

    Original file (199700608.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    950324: Applicant was discharged.2. The evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting to Army standards by providing counseling and even by imposition of nonjudicial punishment. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002078201

    Original file (2002078201.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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. 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 -...