Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2007/11/30 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant 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?
Tender Offer: NA
See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits
III. Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 990301
Discharge Received: Date: 990415 Chapter: 14-12b AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKA Unit/Location: HHC, 1-30 IN, Fort Benning, GA
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 22
Current ENL Date: 980217 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 1Mos, 29Days ?????
Total Service: 5 Yrs, 4Mos, 16Days ?????
Previous Discharges: USCG 931130-971125/HD
USCGIRR 971126-980216/HD
Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 63T Bradley Fighting Vehicle Mechanic GT: 117 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states he is the head mechanic and shop supervisor at Midsouth Auto Parts, Inc and a full time student in Business Management (school unknown). Nothing in the record to validate these accomplishments.
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 1 March 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 for Patterns of Misconduct for repeatedly writing worthless checks, 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 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 5 April 1999, 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 applicants military records, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicants 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 applicants service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. Furthermore, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. Additionally, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 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: 24 October 2008 Location: Washington, D.C.
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: NA
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: NA
VIII. 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.
IX. Board Decision
XI. Certification Signature
Board Vote: Approval Authority:
Character - Change 0 No change 5
Reason - Change 0 No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20070017723
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 3 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011578
The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 24 March 2003, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100015300
Applicant Name: ????? 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: No...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070015573
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 12 January 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-commission of a serious offense for being counseled numerous times for substandard performance; received a Summarized Article 15 for disobeying a lawful order (980925); and received a Field Grade Article 15 for driving drunk (981221), with a...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060012037
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 26 March 2001, 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 (receiving two Article 15's and being counseled several times for misconduct within a six month time frame), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090009397
Applicant Name: ????? On 23 August 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. 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 | CY2009 | AR20090007770
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 24 April 2002, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense in that he tested positive on a urinalysis for marijuana use (011115) and again (020221), and also demonstrated a pattern of misconduct including failures to repair and dereliction of duty, with an under other than...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080020041
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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080005112
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 13 March 1995, 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 for his lack of respect for Army rules and regulations coupled with acts of misconduct which bring discredit to the Army, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 5 May 1995, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080014102
Applicant Name: ????? On 20 June 2007, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 9 January 2008, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070018427
Applicant Name: ????? 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 26 April 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.