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): 011217
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:
ASR
a. Period entered for: 4 Years EIB
b. Entry date: 980904
c. Age: 19 Years DOB: 790813
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
GT: 95 3. Highest grade
achieved:
f. Length of Service: E3
3 Year(s) 3 Month(s) 9 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: NONE
Date Offense(s)
7. Court-Martial data:
a. SCM:
Date Offense(s)
b. SPCM:
Date Offense(s)
010907 Disrespect to SGT in (010602), two specifications; DOLO
by SGT on (010602); assault SGT on (010602); and, assault
SPC on (010602).
c. GCM:
Date Offense(s)
8. Remarks: Applicant’s record shows that he was confined on 010907;
however, documentation does not show date of release.
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. On 7 September 2001, the applicant was convicted by Special Court-
Martial of disrespect to a SGT; disobeying a lawful order from a SGT;
assaulting a SGT; and, assaulting a SP4. He was sentenced to a reduction
to private/E-1 and 100 days of confinement. He was confined on 7 September
2001. Further, evidence of record shows that on 5 December 2001, 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, under honorable
conditions discharge. The reasons cited for discharge were the same events
upon which he was convicted by Special Court-Martial. He was advised of
his rights. The applicant waived his right to legal counsel, was advised
of the impact of the discharge action, 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(s) reviewed the proposed discharge action and
recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under
honorable conditions discharge. On 12 December 2001, 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 17 December 2001, the applicant was discharged. At the time
of discharge, the applicant had completed 3 years, 3 months and 9 days of
active military service in the period under review.
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 030825, with one (1) enclosure(s).
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, D.C. on 10 May
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:
( X ) Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as
follows:
Board Issue: (2) The characterization of service was too harsh.
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.
(2) The issue is accepted. 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. While the Board does not condone the
applicant’s misconduct, the Board noted that his separation physical
indicated that he was treated for a bipolar disorder and a personality
disorder. In addition, the Board noted that all the misconduct annotated
in the applicant’s official record transpired on one day in his three years
of service. Given the applicant’s mitigating medical condition and his
length of service, the Board found that the preponderance of his service
was honorable and that the characterization of service was inequitable.
Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of
characterization of service to fully honorable. The Board determined that
the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change
it.
(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:
( X ) Proper.
( ) Improper as to characterization. Change characterization to
.
( ) Improper as to reason. Change reason to
under .
( ) Equitable.
( X ) Inequitable as to characterization. Change characterization to
Honorable.
( ) 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 4 1
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
TO: ARBA Support Division-St Louis Date: 14 May 2004
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 characterization of discharge to Honorable.
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 applicant
INDEX RECORD:
AR Number: 2003095866 INDEX NUMBERS: A9406
Date of Review: 040510 A9218
Character of Service: GD A0100
Date of Discharge: 011217
Authority: AR 635-200 C14
Reason: A6730
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: HD 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
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003099004
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 | AR2004103388
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. RON WILLIAMS Case...
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003092361
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. 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 Reviewing...
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003099001
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 | CY2003 | 2003087274
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 | CY2003 | 2003094293
On 4 April 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. On 30 April 2002, the applicant was discharged. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072273C070403
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 | CY2003 | 2003084940
The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and requested a hearing by a board of officers, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED) The Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, determined that the characterization of service is inequitable because the applicant's generally acceptable personal conduct and performance of...
ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR20040002856
Notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant’s discharge, the Board found that the applicant’s misconduct was mitigated by the overall length and quality of her service; her emotional state at the time of said misconduct; and the subsequent decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs that the applicant was totally disabled due to “unemployability.” In view of the foregoing, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable and...
ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001058350
The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, conditionally waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent on receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditions, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 13 August 1990, the applicant was discharged. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant