Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 080410 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: 010301
Discharge Received: Date: 010412 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: HQs and A Company, 407th Forward Support Battalion, Division Support Command, 82d Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 000509, DUI, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $503.00 x 2 (suspended), 45 days extra duty, 45 days restriction. (FG)
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 010302, SCM, disrespect in language and deportment toward a SGT, a Noncmmissioned officer (010214); violation of lawful general regulation (010214) and drunk on duty (010214). Confinement for 30 days, reduction to Private E-1, and forfeiture of $300.
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 18
Current ENL Date: 990708 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 09Mos, 05Days ?????
Total Service: 01 Yrs, 09Mos, 05Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 55B1P/Ammunition Spec GT: 99 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: Clayton, AL
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
he evidence of record shows that on 1 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 misconductfor havig received a Field Grade Article 15 on 9 May 2000 for driving while impaired, assault and disrespect to a noncomissioned officer, drunk on duty, and drinking under age, 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 15 March 2001, 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. It states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor, and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldiers service is so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate. Chapter 14 of this regulation 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 the entire applicants military records, and the issue submitted with the application, 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 the former soldiers service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of 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. Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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 February 2009 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
X. 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: ?????
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20080005496
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060000255C080324
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 intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were:...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070015235
His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12b by reason of misconduct- pattern of misconduct, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicants discharge are not contained in the available records; however the record does contain a Memorandum of Notification Legal Sufficiency Review, dated 20 October 1992 which states the Commander,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013382
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 27 March 2001, 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 misconductpattern of misconduct for being drunk on duty x 2 (000909), (010214); provided alcohol to two minors (000909) and failed to pay just debt, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 26 April 2001, the separation authority approved the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110011257
Applicant Name: ?? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 27 February 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090020006
On 26 March 2009, 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 a Military Police Report dated 7 September 2008. b. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007293
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 5 June 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductcommission of a serious offense for testing positive for amphetamines and methamphetamines and admitting in a signed, sworn statement to CID that she used said drugs on or about 27 February 2004, with a recommendation that the applicant be retained in service. ...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080016138
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 22 April 2008, 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 misconductfor knowingly possessing a Toshiba hard drive, on a Dell laptop computer, which contained photographic images and video files of child pornography, with an Under Other Than Honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013029
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. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony, and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. ...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000638
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. 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 | AR20090016106
Applicant Name: ????? On 25 July 2004, 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 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...