Application Receipt Date: 060816
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: 010110
Discharge Received: Date: 010125
Chapter: 4-2B AR: 600-8-24
Reason: Unacceptable Conduct
RE: SPD: JNC
Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 2nd Battalion, 11th Infantry Regiment, Fort Benning, GA 31905
Time Lost: Absent without leave for a total of 36 days (000828-001002). Applicant surrendered to military authority at Fort Benning, GA.
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 001204/Absent without leave/(Flag Officer)
Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
DOB: 750312
Current ENL Date: 991219 Current ENL Term: Indef Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 01Mos, 25Days ?????
Total Service: 04 Yrs, 07Mos, 22Days ?????
Previous Discharges: ARNG-960622-970101/NA
ADT-970102-970410/UNC
ARNG-970410-991218/HD
Highest Grade: 2LT
Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 00E (Student Officer) GT: NA EDU: BA Degree Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR, AAM (2d Award)
V. Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record:
Current Address:
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states he is the Senior Production Development Engineer for a company in his home town and a active participant in the community where he volunteers within several organizations.
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
Evidence of record shows that on 19 December 2000, the Commander, United States Army Infantry Center and Fort Benning, Fort Benning, GA, notified the applicant of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 600-8-24, by reason of misconduct, an act of personal misconduct (absent without leave from 28 August 2000 to 3 October 2000 and receiving a General Officer Article 15 for being absent without leave on 13 December 2000). The applicant was directed to show cause for his retention on active duty because of misconduct. He was advised that he could submit a voluntary resignation in lieu of elimination or submit a rebuttal and request an appearance before a Board of Inquiry. On 21 December 2000, the applicant elected not to submit a resignation in lieu of elimination or to make a statement or submit a rebuttal in his own behalf. Records show that the applicant's chain of command recommended that he be eliminated from the service. On 1 January 2001, the Commander, United States Army Infantry Center and Fort Benning, Fort Benning, GA 31905, recommended that the applicant be eliminated from the service with a general, under honorable conditions. The Ad Hoc Review Board met, and on 8 March 2001, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board, and directed that he be discharge from the U.S. Army with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
b. Legal Basis for Separation:
Army Regulation 600-8-24 sets for the basic authority for Officer Transfers and discharges. Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the eliminating of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and the interest of national security.
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:
After careful review of all the applicant's military records for the term of service under review, the analyst recommend that relief be denied in this case. The evidence of record shows that the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4, paragraph 2b, unacceptable conduct with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The analyst concluded that by his misconduct, the applicant diminished the overall 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 applicants service mitigated the misconduct. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Furthermore, the analyst congratulates the applicant on his work achievements and he is to be commended for his efforts. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable.
VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing
Type of Hearing: Date: 22 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 0 No change 5 - Character
Change 0 No change 5 - Reason
(Board member names available upon request)
IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts 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:
CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 29 August 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20060011688
Applicant Name: Mr.
______________________________________________________________________
Page 5 of 5 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008213
On 31 January 2001, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board, and directed that the applicant be discharged from the U.S. Army with a characterization of service of honorable. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicants military records during the term of service under review, documents, and the issues he submitted, the analyst found that someone in the separation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110006066
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's military records for the term of service under review and the issues submitted with the application, the analyst determined that the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. The evidence of record shows that the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2b, AR 600-8-24, by reason...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070017727
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 6 August 2003, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 600-8-24, paragraphs 4-2 and 4-20 by reason of substandard performannce of duty, moral and professional dereliction, and misconduct. The Ad Hoc Review Board met, and on 19 December 2003, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board, and directed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110022201
Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he was discharged from active duty because he received a GOMOR while in basic officer leadership course II at Fort Benning, Ga. The applicants statements alone do not overcome the governments presumption of regularity and he has not provided any documentation or further evidence in support of his request for an upgrade of his discharge and the reason for his...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008162
Current ENL Service: 07 Yrs, 10 Mos, 17 Days ????? On 14 April 2000, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed that the applicant be separated from the Army for misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, with an honorable discharge. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the term of service under review and considering the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080019847
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 11 Mos, 01 Days ????? On 19 April 2002, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed that the Applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The Applicants 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 Army Officers.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080004394
The Ad Hoc Review Board met, and on 22 August 2006, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board, and directed that the applicant be separated from the U.S. Army with a characterization of service of fully honorable. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's military records for the term of service under review, the issues and documents that she submitted, the analyst...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080012646
On 26 April 2001, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The applicants 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 Army Officers. Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers:...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110012081
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states: "I was discharged from the US Army for Unacceptable Conduct secondary to my romantic involvement with a Non-Commissioned Officer. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's military records during the term of service under review, the issue and document submitted with the application, the analyst determined that the evidence was not sufficiently...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090010596
On 25 May 2007, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The applicant states that his chain of command or convening authority should have medical retired him or given him a medical discharge because he was pending a Medical Evaluation Board. Additionally, the analyst noted the applicant's issue...