Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2008/08/05 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: 951121
Discharge Received: Date: 960613 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: Combat Training Committee, Fort Leonard Wood, MO
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: 32
Current ENL Date: 940419 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 01Mos, 25Days ?????
Total Service: 15 Yrs, 02Mos, 23Days ?????
Previous Discharges: USAR-810321-810428/NA
RA-810429-831201/HD
RA-831202-870901/HD
RA-870902-891113/HD
RA-891114-920722/HD
RA-920723-940418/HD
Highest Grade: E-6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 91B3H Medical Spec/Instructor GT: 115 EDU: AA Degree Overseas: Germany/Turkey Combat: Southwest Asia (910720-911006)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM-4, AGCM-3, AOM, NDSM, SWASM-1 BSS, HSM, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-2, EFMB, ASUA,
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: Birmingham, AL
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 21 November 1995, 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 for attempting to engage in a nonprofessional relationship with two initial entry trainees, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, 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 and senior intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 17 January 1996, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. On 18 March 1996, the administrative separation board convened. The applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended that the applicant be discharged with issuance of a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions, and further recommended that the separation action be suspended for 180 days. On 17 May 1996, the Staff Judge Advocate recommended that the separation approving authority approve the separation, issue the applicant a general, under honorable conditions discharge and not suspend the separation. On 17 May 1996, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board, except that the separation be suspended and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
The applicant's record contains an approved Bar to Reenlistment dated 26 February 1996.
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 during the period of enlistment under review and the issues he 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 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 noted the applicant's issues; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. In view of the foregoing, 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: 15 May 2009 Location: Washington, DC
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
X. 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 AR20080012652
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090013094
On 7 May 1996, the separation authority referred the applicant's separation case to a administrative separation board to determine whether the applicant should be separated from the Army IAW procedures set forth in AR 635-200. By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and the misconduct diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. However, in review of the applicants entire service record, the analyst found that these...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080007208
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 15 November 1995, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconducta pattern of misconduct culminating with an arrest for Driving While Intoxicated, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. On 8 February 1996 the applicant consulted with legal counsel and requested a hearing before an administrative separation...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080008811
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 24 October 1996, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductfor wrongfully using marijuana, making a false official statement and attempting to defraud the Federal Government, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090004207
Application Receipt Date: 2009/02/13 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 149 submitted by the applicant. On 5 May 1997, The United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence.
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008160
On 14 October 1997, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged from the service 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 characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015136
On 28 August 1996, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board, and submitted a statement in his own behalf. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's military records, and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant's characterization of service be upgraded to...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080004745
Applicant Name: ????? On 30 January 1996, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions 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: ?????
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007569
Applicant Name: ????? On 20 March 1998, the separation authority approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080003779
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 5 November 2002, 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 wrongful use of marijuana, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. On 6 November 2002, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of her case by an Administrative...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080012928
Applicant Name: ????? On 4 January 1996, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and requested consideration of her case by an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf. On 5 April 1996, the separation authority having reviewed the request for reconsideration submitted by the Applicant, approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general,...