Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001054013
Original file (2001054013.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): 980601

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:
                            NONE
a. Period entered for: 4 Years
b. Entry date: 950414
c. Age: 21 Years DOB: 731120
d. Educational level: 13 years
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 103 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E3
3 Year(s) 1 Month(s) 18 Day(s)

4. Performance evaluations:
NONE

PART III - SERVICE HISTORY
SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued

5. Periods of unauthorized absence:

Status Inclusive dates
         AWOL 0

         Mil conf 0

         Civil conf 0

         Other 950711-950713;


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: Unit commander’s recommendation states that applicant received a
                  Company Grade Article 15 (NIF).

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 27 January 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 and commission of a serious offense, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted 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, under honorable conditions discharge. On 5 March 1998, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

         b. On 1 June 1998, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 3 years, 1 month, and 18 days of active military 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 010301.
         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:
          ( ) Records review ( X ) Hearing
         b. Type Held:
         ( )Records review ( X ) Hearing
         ( ) Tender Offer

         c. Review/hearing location and date: Washington, DC on 30 July 2001 .

         d. Appearance by:
         Applicant ( X ) Yes ( ) No
         Counsel ( X ) Yes ( ) No

          e. Applicant testified: ( X ) Yes ( ) No
        
         f. Counsel presentation: ( X ) Yes ( ) No
        
         g. Witness(es) testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
2. Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing: 18 documents

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) The issue is rejected. The Board carefully examined the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and heard his testimony. There was a full consideration of all service including the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses. The applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of 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 the misconduct or poor duty performance. 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 noted the command made an assessment of the applicant's potential for becoming a fully satisfactory soldier. The evidence of record established that the applicant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome noted deficiencies. As the applicant did not subsequently conform to required standards of discipline and performance, the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service. In conjunction with his discharge for misconduct, the applicant was assigned the appropriate RE Code of 3. An RE Code 3 indicates that the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. 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 1 4
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:


GERARD W. SCHWARTZ
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
Review Board

Official:




EARNEST C. SMITH, JR.
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: 2001054013 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 010730 A9315
Character of Service: GD A0100
Date of Discharge: 980601
Authority: AR 635-200 C14
Reason: A6750
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 | CY2000 | 2000042496

    Original file (2000042496.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE TO: ARBA...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003090506

    Original file (2003090506.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. 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 - Application...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000042215

    Original file (2000042215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board noted the applicant’s contention that his discharge was inequitable because he was wrongfully punished for the offense which led to his separation from the Army, however, the commission of a serious offense obligated military authorities to consider the applicant for discharge. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003094287

    Original file (2003094287.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SECTION B - Prior Service Data Other discharge(s): ServiceFromToType Discharge RA 940415 970205 Honorable PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEWSECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances:a. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RON WILLIAMS Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:SPURGEON A. MOORE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000042157

    Original file (2000042157.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 May 1999, the applicant was discharged. 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. WADE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:WILSON A. SHATZER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999024749

    Original file (1999024749.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data NONEOther discharge(s): ServiceFromToType Discharge PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEWSECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances:a. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 99033028

    Original file (99033028.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. Mark Armstrong Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000039869

    Original file (2000039869.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. 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. EXHIBITS: A -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003087973

    Original file (2003087973.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Evidence of record shows that on 17 December 1998, 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. On 29 December 1998, the applicant consulted legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003090423

    Original file (2003090423.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter 10 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 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. The Board, being...