Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 080110 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: NA
See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits
III. Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 070131
Discharge Received: Date: 070216 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: HQs, 3rd Infantry BCT, 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry), Fort Drum, New York
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070129, wrongfully used marijuana (061120-061219), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $650.00 (suspended), 30 days extra duty. (CG)
060926, AWOL for 7 days (060707-060713), fail to go to his appointed place of duty (060719), and missed movement (060712), reduction to E-1 (suspended), forfeiture of $713.00, 45 days extra duty, 45 days restriction. (FG)
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 26
Current ENL Date: 060104 Current ENL Term: 3 Years 16 weeks
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 01Mos, 13Days ?????
Total Service: 01 Yrs, 01Mos, 13Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 13B10/Cannon Crewmember GT: 109 EDU: GED Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: Tampa, Flordia
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 31 Janurary 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductcommission of a serious offense for testing positive for marijuana (061219) and receiving a Field Grade Article 15 for AWOL, failing to report and missing movement 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 2 February 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.
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, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. An RE code of 4 can not be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.
Furthermore, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. 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: 6 November 2008 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: NA
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: None
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 AR20080001330
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090019985
On 6 November 2006, 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 22 November 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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060009428
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 separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with an uncharacterized separation of service. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 25 June 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090005040
Applicant Name: ????? 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. However, in review of the applicants entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080003709
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 26 May 1994 , 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 being repeatedly counseled for being failing to be at or late to his appointed place of duty, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010871
The separation authority approved the applicant's discharge as entry-level status, with the description of service as uncharacterized. Army Regulation 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldiers service will be uncharacterized when his separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090017197
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 23 January 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconductfor failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 3 (060428, 060502, and 060515); being AWOL x 2 (060531-060620 and 060818-060918); disobeying a lawful order from a senior noncommissioned officer (060503); and...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010000
Applicant Name: ????? On 16 June 2005, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than 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 | CY2008 | AR20080002555
The separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be separated from the Army with an uncharacterized discharge. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicants military records during the period of enlistment under review and the issues he submitted, the analyst noted from the evidence of record that the applicant received an uncharacterized separation while in an entry-level status (ELS). Board...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100013978
Applicant Name: ????? The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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.
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090011657
Applicant Name: ????? Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issues that he never spoke to a military lawyer and wasn't aware of the affect of the discharge; however, records show that the 14 January 2003, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial and indicated that he understood that he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge...