Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010713
Original file (AR20070010713.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name: ?????

Application Receipt Date: 070803	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: The applicant submitted no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board.

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: 050223
Discharge Received:     Date: 050307   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKQ
Unit/Location: HHB, 214th FA, Fort Sill, OK 73503 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 041108, wrongfully used cocaine and marijuana between (040913-041013), disobeyed a lawful order from a 1SG (041013), and failure to report x 6 (041007), (041005), (040827), (040607), (040504), and (040504), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $597 x 2, extra duty for 45 days and restriction for 45 days (FG).       

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Year/Month:  8208  
HOR City, State: Hinesville, GA
Current ENL Date: 031028    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 01  Yrs, 04 Mos, 10 Days ?????
Total Service:  01  Yrs, 04 Mos, 10 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 74D10 Chemical Operation Spec   GT: 90   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 23 February 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-commission of a serious offense for a positve urinalysis test for marijuana and cocaine and multiple failures to report 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  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, however, a general 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 during the period of enlistment under review and the issues 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 analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 
      

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 6 August 2008              
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 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.  























								        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: NA
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: 8 August 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070010713
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 5 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060011685

    Original file (AR20060011685.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 3 May 2004, 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 (on numerous occasions, without authority, wrongfully used cocaine), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant's election of rights, the unit and intermediate commander's recommendation for separation from the...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016213

    Original file (AR20060016213.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 7 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-for wrongful use of cocaine (041114-041117), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in his own behalf. Certification Signature and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080018035

    Original file (AR20080018035.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 1 March 2006, 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 narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)", and the separation code is "JKK."

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015811

    Original file (AR20060015811.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board, and did submit a statement in his own behalf. On 10 January 2005, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honor conditions. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S....

  • 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 | AR20060013142

    Original file (AR20060013142.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 041013 Chapter: 12 AR: 135-178 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: 311th Theater Signal Command USAR Element, Fort Meade, MD 20755 Time Lost: NIF Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. In the absence of corroborated evidence to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all requirements of...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013366

    Original file (AR20070013366.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 27 May 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070003557aC071031

    Original file (AR20070003557aC071031.doc) 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 10 April 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicant was subsequently heard by the Army Discharge Review Board on (041013), and his characterization of...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100009595

    Original file (AR20100009595.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 050504 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: B Co, 3-327 IN Regiment, Fort Campbell, KY Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): When the applicant was charged, he was an E-1. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013162

    Original file (AR20060013162.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 01 Mos, 14 Days ????? On 7 January 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. 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...