Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000038624
Original file (2000038624.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): 970318

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: NIF GCMDL(2)
b. Entry date: 951118 NCOPDR(2)
c. Age: 25 Years DOB: 650715
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 96 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E5
1 Year(s) 4 Month(s) 1 Day(s)

4. Performance evaluations:
See OMPF

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)
         961217 Fail to obey (961127)

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

Other discharge(s):

          Service   From      To        Type Discharge
         RA 880127 910617 Honorable



PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

         a. Evidence of record shows that on 25 February 1997, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—patterns of misconduct, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 28 February 1997, the applicant acknowledged notification, consulted with legal counsel and requested a hearing by a board of officers and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 7 March 1997, the applicant again consulted with legal counsel and waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board. 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, under honorable conditions discharge. On 10 March 1997, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

         b. On 18 March 1997, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had 1 year, 4 months, and 1 day on his current enlistment and 9 years, 1 month, and 19 days total time in service.

         c. The unit commander recommended the applicant be separated due to his failure to follow an order and his repeatedly writing bad checks.

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 991220.
         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 March 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 examined 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. The United States Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable. The Board concluded that the applicant’s misconduct diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. Additionally, 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. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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       

                                 
MRS. WADE
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: 2000038624 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 000315 A0100
Character of Service: GD A9445
Date of Discharge: 970318 A9201
Authority: AR 635-200 C14
Reason: A6700
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 | CY2004 | AR20040000876

    Original file (AR20040000876.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    SECTION B - Prior Service Data Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge RA 901213 931213 Honorable PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and requested appearance before a board of officers. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000049279

    Original file (2000049279.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE C-1: DD Form 149, dated 001031. 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 - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted...

  • 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 | CY2004 | AR2004100474

    Original file (AR2004100474.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. Evidence of record shows that on 14 May 1997, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l3, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Remarks: Change SPD to “JFT.” SECTION B -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004105399

    Original file (AR2004105399.doc) 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. Minority...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002077185

    Original file (2002077185.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge RA 931008 970317 Honorable PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. His DD Form 214 indicates that he was released from active duty under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200 by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions (GD). SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001060237

    Original file (2001060237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Evidence of record shows that on 26 August 1998, 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. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003096960

    Original file (AR2003096960.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 28 March 2000, the separation authority approved the Boards findings and recommendations and directed that the applicant be...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001052953

    Original file (2001052953.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Evidence of record shows that on 23 May 2000, 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. A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED) PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1997 | 199701537

    Original file (199701537.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    850710: Applicant was discharged.2. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. CASE NO: AD97-01537 PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified COL SHATZER Post Hearing Reviewer PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE (X) NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION WILLIAM E. MATHEWS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army...