Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110011122
Original file (AR20110011122.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/05/19	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states: "My discharge is improper because it was bias.  It was based upon six counseling statements, three of which were in the same day during my discharge process I submitted a congressional which resulted in my chain of command issuing an earlier discharge date.  The congressional is still pending."

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: 110308
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 110418   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: D Co, 3/27th  

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 110112, Failure to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty (100908, 100921, 101014, 101122, 101123, 101130, and 101130) and disrespect towards a commissioned officer (101122), reduction to E1; forfeiture of $723.00 pay per month for two months (suspended); and extra duty for 45 days, (FG).

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 100201    Current ENL Term: 04 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 02 Mos, 18 Days ?????
Total Service:  		01 Yrs, 02 Mos, 18 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92A10/Automated Logistical Specialist   GT: 104   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None










VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 8 March 2011, 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 misconduct for having received a Field Grade Article 15 (110112) for six violations of failure to report and one violation of disrespect toward a commissioned officer, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.
       
       On 30 March 2011, the applicant waived her right to consult with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 1 April 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge 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 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 all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review, issues, and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of her 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 her 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 applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  
       
       The narrative reason for separation is governed by specific directives.  The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct," and the separation code is "JKA."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       The applicant contends her discharge was improper because it was biased.  The analyst noted the applicant's contentions, however, the analyst concluded that the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  Having examined all the circumstances, the analyst determined that the applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant’s service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.
       
       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.  
       
       In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined 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: 18 January 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, Character Witness Statements (7), Incident Statements (5), Congressional                   DD Form 214 for the period of service under review.

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  






















        
IX.  Board Decision						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: 
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder




















Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20110011122
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 4 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110020563

    Original file (AR20110020563.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c by reason of misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The separation authority reviewed the proposed discharge, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110019306

    Original file (AR20110019306.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 19 November 2010, 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 misconduct—for receiving a CG Article 15 for making a false official statement (100917); a supplementary Article 15 for communicating a threat (101019); and for receiving numerous counselings for misconduct that was prejudicial to good order and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120008907

    Original file (AR20120008907.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 01 Mos, 16 Days The DD Form 214 under review makes reference to the applicant having 01 mos and 02 days of prior active service, however the record is void of an documents in support of this claim. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 29 April 2011, 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120003531

    Original file (AR20120003531.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110013911

    Original file (AR20110013911.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The unit commander recommended that the applicant be retained on active duty. Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110024442

    Original file (AR20110024442.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 5 May 2011, the separation authority approved the applicant's unconditional waiver of a administrative separation board and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110011013

    Original file (AR20110011013.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 19 December 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted 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: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change Official: BONITA E. TROTMAN Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder Legend: AWOL...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120004413

    Original file (AR20120004413.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issues submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The analyst acknowledges the applicant’s in-service...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080012850

    Original file (AR20080012850.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 27 June 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct for violating a lawful order (080522), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110022071

    Original file (AR20110022071.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 16 November 2008, 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 misconduct for receiving a Company Grade Article 15 for failing to repair (FTR) and disobeying an order from an NCO (981005); receiving a Summarized Article 15 for FTR (981102); FTR x 8 (971006, 971008, 971210, 980618, 980714,...