Application Receipt Date: 2006/09/05
Prior Review Prior Review Date: None
I. Applicant Request
Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: See DD Form 293 or summarize the applicant's issues
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: 2006/04/14
Chapter: 14-12c(2) AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)
RE: SPD: JKK
Unit/Location: HHC, 84th Chem Bn, Fort Leonard Wood MO
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF
Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB: 84/01/15
Current ENL Date: 05/07/29 Current ENL Term: 4 Years
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 8Mos, 16Days
Total Service: Yrs, 08Mos, 16Days
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 74D10 GT: 100 EDU: High School Overseas: Korea Combat: None
Decorations/Awards:
V. Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record:
Current Address:
Post Service Accomplishments: None
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 10 December 1999, 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, 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 January 2000, 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,
commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities,
desertion or absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a
member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is
impracticable or is 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 she submitted, the analyst determined that the
applicant’s available record of service during the period of enlistment
under review is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the
events that led to his discharge from the Army. However, the applicant’s
record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the
applicant's signature. This document identifies the reason and
characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government
regularity in the discharge process. That DD Form 214 indicates that the
applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200,
paragraph 12c by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense, with
a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
Barring evidence to the contrary, 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. Therefore, the
analyst determined 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: 26 Sep 07
Location: Washington DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: N/A
Witnesses/Observers: N/A
Exhibits Submitted: N/A
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 No change (Character)
Change No change (Reason)
(Board member names available upon
request)
IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
Case report reviewed and verified by: Christine Martinson, Examiner
X. Board Action Directed
No Change
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to:
Other:
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade:
XI. Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority:
MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board
Official:
MARY E. SHAW DATE:
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013025
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 10 December 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductpattern of misconduct, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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 28 January 2000, the separation...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013025aC071121
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 10 December 1999, 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, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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 28 January 2000, the...
AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013032
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 8Mos, 16Days ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 10 December 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductpattern of misconduct, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. That DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12c by reason of...
AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013026
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 10 December 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductpattern of misconduct, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 28 January 2000, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013026aC071121
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 10 December 1999, 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, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 28 January 2000, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008492
On 23 January 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. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE:...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010448
Legal Basis for Separation: National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 govern procedures for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel of the Army National Guard and Army Reserve. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, Paragraph 8-26e (2) (a), NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions and the analyst presumed...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010454
Applicant Name: ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general under honorable conditions discharge. 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 characterization of service was too harsh based on the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080017886
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 and documents submitted by the Applicant. The DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12c(2) by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12c by reason of...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080015082
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The Applicant states, "my discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in the 4 yrs and 10 months of service with no other adverse action". The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, paragraph 8-26, NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Board Action...