Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060006702
Original file (AR20060006702.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Application Receipt Date: 060508	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?  
Yes    No        Tender Offer:   ?????

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Original Character of Discharge
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge:    Date: 980330
Discharge Received:     Date: 980504   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: 618th Engineer Company, 307th Engineer Battalion, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC  28307-5100 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 971208, stole (2) Penthouse Magazines of a value of about $12.58, the property of the military (971207), (Company Grade) 

2nd Article 15, 980219, violated a lawful general order by wrongfully entering the post exchange while your privileges were revoked (980119), stole a Sony Playstation CD game, and music CD, the property of the military, of an unknown value (980119), (Field Grade)

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  770512  
Current ENL Date: 970623    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 10 Mos, 12 Days ?????
Total Service:  0 Yrs, 10 Mos, 12 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E2
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 62E1P Heavy Construction Equipment Operator   GT: 103   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: See DD Form 293

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 30 March 1998, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct (you were apprehended for shoplifting at the main post exchange, and apprehended for shoplifting at the Airborne post exchange), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant waived 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.  On 8 April 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.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
      Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and 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.

      c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
      After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By his misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his 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.  Furthermore, the analyst congratulates the applicant on his work achievements since departing the Army.  However, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable.   
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 7 March 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: N/A




VIII.  Board Decision
The discharge was:			Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The characterization of service was:   Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The narrative reasons were: 	       	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

DRB voting record:  		      	Change     No change    (Character)
		 			       	Change     No change    (Reason)
					      (Board member names available upon request)

IX.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.   
























Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Ron Williams, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: None
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 9 March 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060006702

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 6 of 6 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090006746

    Original file (AR20090006746.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 20 January 2009 , 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 | CY2006 | AR20060011607

    Original file (AR20060011607.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 8 Mos, 22 Days ????? The analyst noted that the applicant's "Separation Code (SPD) is incorrect on the DD Form 214 (JKD), and the applicant allude's to this in his issue. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 17 August 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014548

    Original file (AR20060014548.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 03 Mos, 00 Days ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment unde review, the issue and document she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060002388

    Original file (AR20060002388.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service-in lieu of court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080009846

    Original file (AR20080009846.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The senior intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other that honorable conditions discharge. On 14 April 1999, 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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization...

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070012366

    Original file (AR20070012366.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 15 December 1992, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016051

    Original file (AR20060016051.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 19 October 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-for drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, underage drinking x 4, and shoplifting with a general under honorable conditions discharge. On 19 November 2003, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013221

    Original file (AR20060013221.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. It is 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. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board...

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070004571

    Original file (AR20070004571.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Total Service: 06 Yrs, 01 Mos, 11 Days ????? Chapter 3, Section IV, establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After careful review of all...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070004571aC071121

    On 10 February 1997, the United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence. Chapter 3, Section IV, establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. ...