Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008922
Original file (AR20060008922.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Application Receipt Date: 060620	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See applicant's attached 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: 000720
Discharge Received:     Date: 000901   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: United States army Medical Company, Fort George G. Meade, MD 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 990429/Disrespectful in language towards an noncommissioned officer on 990312 and without authority failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty/(Company Grade).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  771127  
Current ENL Date: 970827    Current ENL Term: 04 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 00Mos, 05Days ?????
Total Service:  03 Yrs, 00Mos, 05Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 91B10 (Medical Specialist)   GT: 90   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR, 
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 20 July 2000, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—patterns of misconduct (receiving a Article 15 for disrespect to an noncommissioned officer and failure to repair on 29 April 1999, assault consummated by a battery, disorderly conduct, and failure to obey lawful orders), 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 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 separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
      
      The applicant has a Military Police Report dated 23 February 2000, in his Official Military Personnel File.

      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, 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 evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  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.  Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends the Board vote to deny relief in this case.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 2 May 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




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 and voted not to change it.





















Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: NA

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 May 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060008922

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007150

    Original file (AR20090007150.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 00Mos, 05Days Dates corrected per ABCMR. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change?

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080005564

    Original file (AR20080005564.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 22 June 2001, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense for having received a Filed Grade Article, a Company Grade Article, and several negative counseling statements, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080008149

    Original file (AR20080008149.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Chapter 10 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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090013370

    Original file (AR20090013370.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 27 February 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense for malingering while in a hostile fire pay zone by shooting himself in the leg while deployed to Iraq (071015), with an other than honorable conditions discharge. On 28 February 2008, the applicant consulted with...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016063

    Original file (AR20060016063.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an Administrative Separation Board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditions discharge and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant's characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. Certification...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070014574

    Original file (AR20070014574.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 29 October 2004, the separation authority approved the unconditional waiver submitted by the applicant, and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080019461

    Original file (AR20080019461.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 19 February 2002, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010081

    Original file (AR20070010081.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 14 February 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 commission of a serious offense for abuse of illegal drugs, and AWOL (030104-030107), with an uncharacterized discharge. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010930

    Original file (AR20080010930.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Additionally, the analyst found that someone in the separation process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code of "4." Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: change block 25, separation authority to "paragraph 14-12b" and block 26, separation (SPD) code to "JKA" under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080006295

    Original file (AR20080006295.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of her case by an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf. While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the length and quality of the applicant's service, to include her combat service and the recommendation of the unit and intermediate commanders for approval with a honorable discharge, mitigated the discrediting...