Upgrade.Vet

ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000035889

Original file (2000035889.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PART II - APPLICATION DATA

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

1. Character of Discharge: General, Under Honorable Conditions

2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 971126

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:
                           AAM
a. Period entered for: 3 Years NDSM
b. Entry date: 950302 SWASMDL/w1BSS
c. Age: 22 Years DOB: 721207 ASR
d. Educational level: GED
e. Aptitude area score:
         GT: 103 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E4
2 Year(s) 8 Month(s) 25 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)
         970905   In that you were found drunk while on duty (970821)
         971006   Disobeyed a lawful command from a CPT, two specifications; (970913); (970918)

7. Court-Martial data: NONE

         a. SCM:
                  Date Offense(s)


         b. SPCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

         c. GCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

8.       Remarks: Creditable service differs from DD Form 214, item 12©, the enlistment date on the DD Form 214, item 12(a) appears to be wrong. Should be: 950302; see orders dated 950302, and the enlistment contract dated 950302 for 3 years. The creditable service item 12 (c) should be 2 years, 8 months and 25 days.

SECTION B - Prior Service Data

Other discharge(s):

         Service From      To        Type Discharge
         ARNGUSMS         911223   920311   NA
         ADT      920312   920626   Uncharacterized
         ARNGUSMS         920627   950302   NA

PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

         a. Evidence of record shows that on undated, 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 general discharge. He was advised of his rights. 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 discharge, and did not submit 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 discharge. On 4 November 1997, the Asst. Staff Judge Advocate determined the separation action to be legally sufficient. On 17 November 1997, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general discharge.

         b. On 26 November 1997, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had 2 years, 8 months, and 25 days, service on his current enlistment and 5 years, 11 months and 5 days, total time in service.

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 000105.
         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 16 February 2000 .

         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 Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review. There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses. Notwithstanding the applicant’s contention that marital strife was the root of his misconduct, the evidence of record indicates that the applicant had numerous counseling statements for the following: disobeying lawful orders, breaking restriction, failing to pay his just debts, alcohol use, and being drunk on duty. In addition, he accepted nonjudicial punishment on two occasions. The Board concluded that the applicant’s 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. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated his 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 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

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: 2000035889 INDEX NUMBERS: A9307
Date of Review: 000216 A9319
Character of Service: GD A9217
Date of Discharge: 971126 A0100
Authority: AR 635-200 C14
Reason: A6730
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: NC 4-1 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 | CY2001 | 2001053437

Original file (2001053437.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Prior review(s): NONE PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review 1. 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 for review of discharge C - Other B - Material...
ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001052685

Original file (2001052685.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. 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:GERARD W. SCHWARTZ Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A -...
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003092903

Original file (2003092903.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

On 19 November 1997, 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 MR. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:SPURGEON A. MOORE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A...
ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR20040002122

Original file (AR20040002122.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. However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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 -...
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000044949

Original file (2000044949.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

The evidence of record shows that the applicant had served only 4 months and 6 days on active duty when the appropriate authority properly approved his request for discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial and issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. Army Regulation 635-200, provides that soldiers who are in entry-level status and request discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial may only receive a discharge under...
ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR20040000287

Original file (AR20040000287.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

On 12 November 1998, the State of New Jersey, Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, Trenton, New Jersey, Orders 316-003, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a reserve of the Army, effective 26 November 1997, with an uncharacterized discharge. Remarks: The Board directs that the applicant’s discharge order from the Reserve of the Army be changed to reflect a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval...
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000050255

Original file (2000050255.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

Evidence of record shows that on 23 May 1995, 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. ...
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003093244

Original file (2003093244.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

The Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, determined that the characterization of service is inequitable based on the minor nature of the offenses, the length and quality of the applicant’s service, and his proximity to his expiration term of service date. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. AR Number: 2003093244 INDEX NUMBERS: A9406 Date of Review: 040121 A9218 Character of Service: GD A9236 Date of...
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000047842

Original file (2000047842.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general discharge. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MRS. WADE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE TO: ARBA Support Division-St Louis Date: 10 November 2000 The Army Discharge Review Board, established under the provisions of Section 30, Public Law 346, 78th...
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003096532

Original file (2003096532.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

On 20 June 1996, 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. 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 Board determined...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000035889

Similar Decisions