Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003090912
Original file (2003090912.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): 980722

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: 6 Years ASR
b. Entry date: 970609
c. Age: 21 Years DOB: 751128
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 114 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E4
1 Year(s) 1 Month(s) 13 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)
         980123   Break medical quarters on (971217);
          971208   Failed to go on (970804), (970918), (971120); DOLO from
                           SFC on (971205) (summarized);
7. Court-Martial data: NONE
         a. SCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

        
         b. SPCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

         c. GCM: 
                  Date Offense(s)


8.       Remarks: The official record contains three Military Police Reports
         dated (980423), (980112), and (971208).
SECTION B - Prior Service Data


Other discharge(s):

          Service   From      To        Type Discharge
         USAR     930320 940630    NA
          ADT               940701 971025    Uncharacterized
         USAR              941026 950530             NA
          RA       950531 970608 Honorable

PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

         a. Evidence of record shows that on 8 June 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—patterns of misconduct, 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(s) reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 7 July 1998, 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 22 July 1998, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 1 year, 1 months, and 13 days of active military service in the period under review and had a total of 5 years, 4 months and
1 day 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 030500.
         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 10 December 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:
         ( )     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 the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses. The Board noted the applicant’s contentions; however, did not find said contentions sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. The Board noted the applicant’s contentions, however, the Board found sufficient misconduct and substandard performance in his official record to warrant the separation action under review. 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. Before initiating action to separate the applicant, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about the deficiencies that could lead to separation. The Board noted that the command made an assessment thereafter of the applicant's potential for becoming a fully satisfactory soldier, and the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service. The Board, being convinced that the characterization of service was 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:


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

Official:




MARY E. SHAW
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: 2003090912 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 031210 A9307
Character of Service: GD A0100
Date of Discharge: 980722
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 | CY2001 | 2001062017

    Original file (2001062017.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board congratulates the applicant on his achievements since departing the Army; however, the evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000035579

    Original file (2000035579.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 Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:THOMAS J. ALLEN Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999027675

    Original file (1999027675.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Prior review(s): NONE PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review 1. His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter l4, Paragraph 14-12B, AR 635-200 by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD). The Board may only change the characterization or reason for discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004102506

    Original file (AR2004102506.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Service data: 2. The separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000050939

    Original file (2000050939.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was advised by legal counsel that the intermediate commanders and the separation authority were not bound by the commander’s recommendation that his service be characterized as honorable. 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 | DRB | CY1999 | 99027133

    Original file (99027133.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Army policy states that an honorable or general discharge is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service. Accordingly, the Board voted to change the characterization of service to fully honorable and the reason for discharge to Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Chapter 5, AR 635-200. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002067339

    Original file (2002067339.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-serious offense, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions (GD). The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004100229

    Original file (AR2004100229.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 July 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and 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 MR. RON WILLIAMS Case...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003089840

    Original file (2003089840.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. The Board noted the applicant’s contentions, however, the Board found sufficient misconduct in his official record to warrant the separation action under review. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001052821

    Original file (2001052821.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 submitted a statement in his 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 case report and directive. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of characterization of service to fully honorable and to...