Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060011518
Original file (AR20060011518.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Application Receipt Date: 060801	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293 and supporting documents.

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: 011015
Discharge Received:     Date: 020212   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: D Company, 50th Signal Battalion (Corps)(Forced Entry)(Airborne), Fort Bragg, NC 28310-5000 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 011009/Assaulted a noncommissioned officer (SSG) by head butting him in the face with his head, disrespectful in language towards a noncommissioned officer (SSG), and willfully disobeyed a lawful order from an noncommissioned officer (SSG) on (010926)/(Field Grade)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  760610  
Current ENL Date: 990121    Current ENL Term: 04 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 00Mos, 22Days ?????
Total Service:  03 Yrs, 00Mos, 22Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31F10 (Mobile Subscriber Equipment Network Switching Systems Operator)   GT: 112   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM (2d Award), ASR, Certificate of Achievement
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 15 October 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—pattern of misconduct (receiving a field grade Article 15 for assaulting a (SSG) on 9 September 2001, and being counseled on numerous occausions and failing to repond to the counseling), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant's election of rights are not contained in the available record, and the analyst is presuming Government Regularity in the discharge process.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 9 January 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.  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, the issue and the documents 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.  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: 1 August 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 1    No change 4   - Character
		 			      Change 0    No change 5   - 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 to deny relief.





















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

Case Number AR20060011518

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010087

    Original file (AR20060010087.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060011669

    Original file (AR20060011669.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 00Mos, 22Days ????? The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008564

    Original file (AR20090008564.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 27 February 2006, the separation authority approved the discharge 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 to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014792

    Original file (AR20060014792.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 3 August 2004, the separation authority approved the applicant's unconditional waiver, waived further rehabilitative efforts 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 applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst's recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008618

    Original file (AR20060008618.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 March 2006, the separation authority 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 the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000485

    Original file (AR20090000485.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. On 17 June 2008, 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 the period of enlistment...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009952

    Original file (AR20070009952.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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 intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070002607aC071031

    Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 17 December 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—pattern of misconduct (was not at his place of duty at the time prescribed on 23 September 2001, disrespectful to an disobeyed a superior noncommissioned officer on 10 August 2001, 13 August 2001, 23 September 2002, and 26 September 2002, with the intent to deceive made...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070015223

    Original file (AR20070015223.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 3 October 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. The analyst determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service to include his post service accomplishments mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008922

    Original file (AR20060008922.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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...