Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013550
Original file (AR20060013550.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Application Receipt Date: 06/09/22	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See attached DD 293; Summary, the applicant states she feels that she deserves to be upgraded to an honorable discharge for the things she did in the Army not listed in her records.  Wants a upgrade to HD and reason changed.

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: NIF
Discharge Received:     Date: 05/04/27   
Chapter: 14, Section III, Paragraph 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Walter Reed Health Care System, Washington, DC 20307-5001 

Time Lost: AWOL 41 days (20041222-20050202)

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  83/08/19  
Current ENL Date: 05/02/03    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 02Mos, 24Days ?????
Total Service:  04 Yrs, 01Mos, 22Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA, 010123-050202 / HD
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31B10 Military Police 95B   GT: 117   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ,NDSM, ASR, GWOTSM
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:
      The evidence of record shows that 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.  Specifics reasons for discharge are as follows:  failed to be at appointed place of duty, disrespect and contempt toward a NCO, repeatedly made false official statements and threatened to choke a NCO.  She was advised of her rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, and was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did  submit a statement in her own behalf.  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 13 April 2005, 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  she  submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. This recommendation was made after full consideration of her faithful and honorable service, as well as her record of misconduct.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  The overall length and quality of the applicant's service and the time that has elapsed since her discharge mitigated the discrediting entry in her service record.  However, the analyst found that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable.    

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 31 October 2007              
Location: Washington DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: None 




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 5    No change 0   - 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 characterization of service was too harsh based upon the applicant's overall length of service and circumstances surrounding the discharge.  

Case report reviewed and verified by: Earl Silver, 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: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 2 November 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060013550

Applicant Name:  Ms.       
______________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 5 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010923

    Original file (AR20070010923.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her DD Form 214 indicates that she was released from active duty training under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-200 by reason of completion of period of active duty training, with service uncharacterized. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 does not indicate a Separation Code. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable, unless the Soldier is in entry-level status.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060011520

    Original file (AR20060011520.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Current ENL Service: 04 Yrs, 00 Mos, 19 Days ????? The unit and intermediate commanders recommended approval of the request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial, 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 and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board does not condone the applicant’s...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015439

    Original file (AR20060015439.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013567

    Original file (AR20070013567.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived her right to an administrative separation board contingent upon receiving a general discharge, and submitted a statement in her own behalf. On 10 March 2004, 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,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060006710

    Original file (AR20060006710.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013131

    Original file (AR20070013131.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. While the applicant's specific facts for which she may have received a general discharge are not contained in the available record, the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include her two combat deployments and the lack of any evidence of misconduct as her DD Form 214 indicates she was discharged as an E-4 mitigated the possible discrediting entry. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060012260

    Original file (AR20060012260.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 25 October 1991, 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060009202

    Original file (AR20060009202.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 10 Mos, 11 Days ????? The separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 8 June 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | Ar20060013041

    Original file (Ar20060013041.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 1993/08/23 Discharge Received: Date: 1993/11/05 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: 988th Military Police Company, Fort Benning, GA 31905 Time Lost: AWOL, from (930630-930819), for a total of 51 Days. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010077

    Original file (AR20060010077.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    I received only 15 days of restriction because the Company Commander said it was reasonable self-defense. The second article 15 resulted from an incident which took place one month after I was discharged from the hospital. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 31 August 2005, 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 received a Company...