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): 020503
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: 2 Years ASR
b. Entry date: 001107
c. Age: 34 Years DOB: 660612
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
GT: 85 3. Highest grade
achieved:
f. Length of Service: E4
1 Year(s) 5 Month(s) 26 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)
011113 Disrespect to SFC on (011016);
7. Court-Martial data: NONE
a. SCM:
Date Offense(s)
b. SPCM:
Date Offense(s)
c. GCM:
Date Offense(s)
8. Remarks: Applicant’s prior service (ARNG) is not reflected on the
DD Form 214.
SECTION B - Prior Service Data
Other discharge(s):
Service From To Type Discharge
ARNGUS 961101 970722 NA
ADT 970723 980227 Uncharacterized
ARNGUS 980227 980713 NA
(Concurrent service)
RA 980714 001106 Honorable
PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW
SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l. Facts and Circumstances:
a. Evidence of record shows that on 13 February 2002, 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. On 13
February 2002, the applicant refused to sign his acknowledgement of
notification of administrative separation. On 14 February 2002, the unit
commander indicated that the applicant refused to submit statements on his
own behalf as well as a request for legal counsel. In addition, the
applicant refused to sign his election of rights. Five individuals in the
applicant’s chain of command witnessed his refusal to sign his election of
rights. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the
service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. On 27 February 2002,
the intermediate commander(s) reviewed the proposed discharge action and
recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under
honorable conditions discharge. On 27 February 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.
b. On 3 May 2002, the applicant was discharged. At the time of
discharge, the applicant had completed 1 year, 5 months, and 26 days of
active military service in the period under review and had a total of 5
years, 6 months and
2 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 031107, with multiple 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 28 July
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 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. His misconduct ultimately
resulted in a bar to reenlistment. 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 found no
evidence that an injury was the cause of the applicant’s misconduct.
Finally, the Board noted that the applicant refused legal counsel at the
time of his discharge. In addition, he refused to sign his election of
rights, notification of separation action, or his DD Form 214. The Board,
being convinced that the narrative 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 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
1901 South Bell Street, 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:
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: 2003098790 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 040728 A9235
Character of Service: GD A0113
Date of Discharge: 020503
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
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003086340
On 5 July 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 as stated above, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. On 3 May 2002, the applicant was discharged. Accordingly, the Board voted to change the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority and to upgrade the characterization of service to fully honorable.
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003083568
On 3 May 2002, the applicant was discharged. 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 for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003099357
On 21 February 2003, 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000035579
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 | CY2003 | 2003094693
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 Board determined that the reason for separation was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000047177
The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. 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 Discharge Review...
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003086071
Evidence of record shows that on 22 August 2002, 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. On 5 September 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004106365
Evidence of record shows that on 15 May 2002, 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Minority views:...
ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002073769
A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE C-1: DD Form 149, dated 020509. The Board may only change the characterization or reason for discharge. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003096748
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 Reviewing...