Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070014317
Original file (AR20070014317.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
Case Number AR20070014317

Applicant Name:          

Application Receipt Date: 071017	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant.

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: 070514
Discharge Received:     Date: 070914   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct, (Serious Offense)
RE:     SPD: JKQ
Unit/Location: 557 Med Evac Co, APO AE 09096 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070419-Attempted to assault (070106), drunk and disorderly (070106), and wrongfully communicated to passenger and crew of flight GF 107, a threat to kill them all (070106), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $650 x 2, suspended, 45 days extra duty and 45 days restriction (FG).   

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  800318  
Current ENL Date: 040609    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 03  Yrs, 03 Mos, 06 Days ?????
Total Service:  06  Yrs, 09 Mos, 19 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-010226-030714/HD
                                      RA-030715-040608/HD 
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 68W10 Health Care Spec   GT: 88   EDU: GED Hs Grad   Overseas: Germany/Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (030401-040122)/Kuwait (061114-070318)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, CMB
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 on 14 May 2007, 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 he attempted to assault Mr. R, drunk, disorderly, communicated a threat to kill all the passengers and crew of flight GF 107 (070106), and violated a no contact order issued by his unit commander (070322), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  0n 15 May 2007, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, and did not submitt a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  On 15 May 2007, the intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 8 June 2007, the senior commander (Commander 3rd CSC), approved the recommendation that the Soldier be separated from the United States Army, prior to expiration of his current term of service with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  On 26 June 2007, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights.  On 24 July 2007, again the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service of no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditons discharge.  The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  On 26 July 2007, the applicant's chain of command reviewed the request for a conditional waiver and recommended approval.  The separation authority (Commander 1st Armored Division), approved the conditional waiver submitted by the applicant's waiving his administrative separation board, and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
      On 18 April 2007, DD Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation shows that the applicant was diagnosed by competent medical authority with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder; has cooperated well with treatment and has a good prognosis for return to full fitness for duty. 
      

      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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issue and independent evidence he 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 his faithful and honorable service, as well as his 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 inequitable.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service; to include his combat service, and the medical circumstances surrounding the discharge, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 19 December 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 3    No change 2   - 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, and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant 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: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner									        
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: 27 December 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE


______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 6 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007562

    Original file (AR20090007562.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 4 April 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct, commisssion of a serious offense in that he wrongfully use marijuana on or between 061207 and 070106, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080004279

    Original file (AR20080004279.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than honorable, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 9 October 2007, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed that the applicant be discharged...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120007236

    Original file (AR20120007236.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 30 May 2007, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service of no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions (although he was not entitled to a board) and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110001544

    Original file (AR20110001544.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 3 April 2007, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and entered into a pre-trial greeement: offer to plead guilty and in the event the command sought to administratively separate him under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, the separation authority agreed that any separation would be characterized as no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditons, which agreement was accepted by the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080015309

    Original file (AR20080015309.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 13 March 2007, 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 Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100018028

    Original file (AR20100018028.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 14 June 2010. 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.

  • 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...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016214

    Original file (AR20060016214.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 based on the overall...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016788

    Original file (AR20060016788.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst determined that the circumstances surrounding the applicant's discharge as established by his two immediate commanders' recommendations for retention mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060011715

    Original file (AR20060011715.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. 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...