Upgrade.Vet

ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003094287

Original file (2003094287.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): 990127

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: 2 Years NDSM
b. Entry date: 970206 NATOMDL
c. Age: 21 Years DOB: 751110 AFSM
d. Educational level: HS Grad ASR
e. Aptitude area score: OSR
         GT: 94 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E4
1 Year(s) 11 Month(s) 22 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)
         980813   Altering a public record between (980528-980721).
         981116   For the purpose of avoiding your duties, feigned pregnancy between (980814-980909); made an official statement which was false on divers occasion between (980601-980630); altering a public record between (980615-980803); and failing to go to her appointed place of duty (980716).

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 an approved Bar to Reenlistment in file dated (981020).

SECTION B - Prior Service Data

Other discharge(s):

         Service From      To        Type Discharge
         RA       940415   970205   Honorable

PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

         a. Evidence of record shows that on 30 December 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. She was advised of her rights. The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 12 January 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 27 January 1999, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 1 year, 11 months, and 22 days of active military service in the period under review and had a total of 4 years, 9 months and 13 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 030807.
         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 17 March 2004 .

         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 contention; however, and did not find said contention sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. The Board determined that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of her service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. By her misconduct and poor duty performance, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. 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. 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


MR. RON WILLIAMS
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: 2003094287 INDEX NUMBERS: A9203
Date of Review: 040317 A9219
Character of Service: GD A9221
Date of Discharge: 990127 A9217
Authority: AR 635-200 C14 A0100
Reason: A6750
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 | 2001058812

Original file (2001058812.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

On 16 October 2000, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions 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 SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:GERARD W. SCHWARTZ Colonel,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000046677

Original file (2000046677.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and conditionally waived consideration of her case by an administrative separation board contingent upon her receiving no less than a general discharge. The Board carefully examined the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and the documents submitted with her application. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant
ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001060676

Original file (2001060676.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

On 14 December 1998, 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. On 12 January 1999, the separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The Board carefully examined the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review.
ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999022263

Original file (1999022263.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. The Board,...
ARMY | DRB | CY1998 | 1998013434

Original file (1998013434.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 MRS. WADE 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 - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted...
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000045708

Original file (2000045708.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE C-1: DD Form 149, dated 990331. 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 | 1999022379

Original file (1999022379.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. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004103027

Original file (AR2004103027.doc) 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. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RIVERA Case...
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003090551

Original file (AR2003090551.doc) 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. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case...
ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999022206

Original file (1999022206.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

The Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable because the applicant's generally acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. ( X ) Change the characterization of the discharge to Honorable.SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:THOMAS J. ALLEN Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board AR Number: 1999022206 INDEX NUMBERS: A9218 Date of Review: 990317 A9202 Character of Service:...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003094287

Similar Decisions