Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014476
Original file (AR20060014476.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Application Receipt Date: 061012	

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: 060227
Discharge Received:     Date: 060315   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)
RE:     SPD: JKK
Unit/Location: B Company, 127th Aviation Support Battalion, Hanau, Germany, APO AE 09165 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051207/Wrongful use of marijuana/(Field Grade)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  840305  
Current ENL Date: 050330    Current ENL Term: 02 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 11Mos, 16Days ?????
Total Service:  02 Yrs, 08Mos, 06Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-030710-050329/HD
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 52C10 (Utility Equipment Repairer)   GT: 95   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, 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 27 February 2006, 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 (tested positive for marijuana (THC) on 24 October 2005), 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 intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 28 February 2006, the separation authority 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 independent evidence he submitted, the analyst noted that the unit commander used “Board Procedures” when notifying the applicant that he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct.  By using “Board Procedures” the authority for approval of the applicant’s separation rested with the General Court-Martial Convening Authority.  The evidence of record shows that someone other than the General Court-Martial Convening Authority approved the applicant’s discharge.  In view of the foregoing, the discharge was improper.  Accordingly, relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable is recommended.  However, the analyst determined that the narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable.  This action does not entail a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code; however, the Board can consider it.  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 7 November 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 4    No change 1   - 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 and is improper.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  However, the Board determined that the reason for 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: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 20 November 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060014476

Applicant Name:  Mr.       
______________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 4 pages

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2006 | AR20060004813

    Original file (AR20060004813.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 12 August 1994, 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 Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070011289

    Original file (AR20070011289.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 12 December 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct- drug abuse—for distributing oxycodone (060701-060831), with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general under honorable conditions...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060017266

    Original file (AR20060017266.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 10 Mos, 16 Days ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Accordingly, full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority is recommended to the Board.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013377

    Original file (AR20060013377.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 June 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. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant's characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008183

    Original file (AR20060008183.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a honorable 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 determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. Certification Signature...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016278

    Original file (AR20060016278.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 1 December 2005, 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: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 27 December...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008150

    Original file (AR20060008150.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 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014823

    Original file (AR20060014823.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 9 July 1997, 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 abuse of illegal drugs (tested positive for methamphetamines and amphetamines between the period of 19 December 1996 and 2 January 1997), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060006703

    Original file (AR20060006703.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is...