Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 07/12/04 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: See DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant.
II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?
Tender Offer: N/A
See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits
III. Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 99/03/30
Discharge Received: Date: 99/05/05 Chapter: 14-12b AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKA Unit/Location: HHT, 1-2 Cavalry Regiment, Ft Polk, LA
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): The applicant has two prior Article 15s (NIF) for assaulting his wife as referenced in the unit commander's recommendation for separation memorandum.
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 20
Current ENL Date: 961015 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 06Mos, 21Days ?????
Total Service: 02 Yrs, 06Mos, 21Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 77F/Petroleum Supply Specialist GT: 87 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 30 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 misconductfor a pattern of misconduct: on 11 February 1999 you received a field grade Article 15 for assaulting your wife, on 13 September 1998 you assaulted your wife, on 28 August 1998 you assaulted your wife, and on 15 August 1998 you assaulted your wife , 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 13 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.
The record contains an MP Report dated 15 April 1998.
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, with regard to changing the reason for discharge to medical, the record does not support the applicants contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that his discharge was the result of any medical condition. 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: 17 October 2008 Location: Washington, D.C.
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: N/A
Witnesses/Observers: N/A
Exhibits Submitted: N/A
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: N/A
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: N/A
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20070017788
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013382
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 28 November 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-commision of a serious offense for using marijuana, and disrespecting and threatening a noncommisioned officer, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090002244
Applicant Name: ????? However, in review of the applicants entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and the characterization of service granted. Board Action Directed 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: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007566.
Applicant Name: ????? On 7 September 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: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | ar20090008328
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting documents submitted by the applicant. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst's recommendation and rationale, the Board...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011606
The applicant consulted with legal counsel, after having been advised by an Officer of the Judge Advocate General, regarding the initiation of separation action pursuant to Chapter 14, AR 635-200, the separation action was initiated contrary to the provisions of paragraph 1-19b, AR 635-200, and consequently legal counsel advised him not to sign the election of rights. On 1 May 1998, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090011654
Applicant Name: ????? On 23 February 2000, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100024482
Applicant Name: ????? It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. 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 Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080009260
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 29 September 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 for receiving a Company Grade Article 15 for larceny (971102); failure to repair and failure to obey a commissioned officer (990325); conviction by a General Court-Martial for failure to repair (990315), AWOL (990418-990519), failure to obey other...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070012786
Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010405
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 14 December 1993, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance for receiving a Summarized Article 15 (930728) for disrespecting and disobeying a noncommissioned officer; a Company Grade Article 15 (931004), for FTR and disobeying a noncommissioned officer; being charged (931125) by the Kaisserslautern Military...