Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003083580
Original file (2003083580.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
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): 990311

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 (3rdAwd)
a. Period entered for: 2 Years GCMDL
b. Entry date: 980313 NDSM
c. Age: 26 Years DOB: 720114 AFSMDL
d. Educational level: HS Grad ASR
e. Aptitude area score: OSR (2)
          GT: 102 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E4
0 Year(s) 11 Month(s) 29 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)
         981217   Assaulted a PVT (981101) and wrongfully engaged in sexual intercourse with a PVT, not his wife on divers occasions between (980715-981008).

7. Court-Martial data: NONE
         a. SCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

        
         b. SPCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

         c. GCM: 
                  Date Offense(s)


8.       Remarks: The applicant has a Military Police Report in file dated (981104).


SECTION B - Prior Service Data


Other discharge(s):

          Service   From      To        Type Discharge
         USAR     900822   900920   NA
         ADT      900921   910130   Uncharacterized
         USAR     910131   911002   NA
         RA       911003   940324   Honorable
         RA       940325   980312   Honorable



PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

         a. Evidence of record shows that on 10 February 1999, 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. He was advised of his rights. 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. 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 5 March 1999, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

         b. On 11 March 1999, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 11 months, and 29 days of active military service in the period under review and had a total of 8 years, 6 months and 19 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 021210.
         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 21 May 2003 .

         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: (2) The characterization of service is improper.
         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 parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI, Paragraph 1, above.

 (2) The issue is accepted. The evidence of record shows that the approving authority considered nonjudicial punishment and a positive urinalysis test from prior periods of honorable service in characterizing the applicant’s discharge. Consideration of such evidence is improper unless the applicant is granted a fully honorable characterization of service. In view of the foregoing, the Board determined that the characterization of service is improper. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of characterization of service to honorable. The Board, found that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.

         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) See Paragraph 3, below.

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

Inasmuch as the Board voted to grant the full relief requested, response to the remaining issue is neither required nor rendered.
PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote

1.       Board conclusion(s):

         The discharge was:

          ( )      Proper.
         ( X )    Improper as to characterization. Change characterization to Honorable .
         ( )      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 5 0

         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       

                                 
MR. RON WILLIAMS
Case Reviewing Official 


PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

 TO: ARBA Support Division-St Louis Date: 23 May 2003

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 the characterization of discharge to Honorable .



SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


SPURGEON A. MOORE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
Review Board

Official:




JOHN F. LONG
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: 2003083580 INDEX NUMBERS: A0110
Date of Review: 030521 A0154
Character of Service: GD A9217
Date of Discharge: 990311
Authority: AR 635-200 C14
Reason: A6700
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: HD 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 | 1999033307

    Original file (1999033307.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Prior review(s): Records/990303 PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review 1. Evidence of record shows that on 18 March 1993, 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 discharge. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RON WILLIAMS Case Reviewing Official PART...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002076119

    Original file (2002076119.TXT) 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. 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 -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025074

    Original file (1999025074.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. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001059402

    Original file (2001059402.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The evidence of record shows that on 31 August 2000, 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 discharge. On 5 September 2000, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004105360

    Original file (AR2004105360.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000042757

    Original file (2000042757.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested a hearing by a board of officers, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 17 May 2000, 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003095794

    Original file (AR2003095794.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 | CY2000 | 2000044209

    Original file (2000044209.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 17 May 2000, the applicant was discharged. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | AR20050004322

    Original file (AR20050004322 .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. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR20040005941

    Original file (AR20040005941.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: 8 April 2005 The Army Discharge Review Board, established under the provisions...