Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2008/04/03 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: 950320
Discharge Received: Date: 950523 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKA Unit/Location: 2nd Trans Co, Fort Hood, TX
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 950125, uttered worthless checks in the sum total of $74 to Pizza 2 Go (041201), reduced to E-3, extra duty for 14 days and restriction for 14 days (suspended), (CG).
940808, uttered worthless checks while check cashing priviliges were suspended, oral reprimand, restriction for 14 days and extra duty for 14 days (Summarized).
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 18
Current ENL Date: 910711 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 10Mos, 13Days ?????
Total Service: 03 Yrs, 10Mos, 13Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 63S10 Heavy Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic GT: 114 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AGCM, NDSM, ASR, OSR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: Auburn, NY
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
Evidence of record shows that on 13 March 1995, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-pattern of misconduct for his lack of respect for Army rules and regulations coupled with acts of misconduct which bring discredit to the Army, 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 and senior intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 5 May 1995, 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 applicant's record contains an approved Bar to Reenlistment dated 13 February 1995.
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, 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 issue; however, the U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable. 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: 30 January 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 AR20080005112
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000357
Applicant Name: ????? On 9 February 2001, 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 | CY2009 | AR20090011731
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 27 September 1994, 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 misconduct-pattern of misconduct for uttering worthless checks, with an honorable discharge. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013158
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 12 December 1996, 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 (uttered six worthless checks totaling $1700.00 and failed to place sufficient funds in Pentagon Federal Credit Union for payment of such checks between 4 October 1996 and 21 October 1996; disobeyed a lawful command from a noncommissioned...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070011073
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 did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On date not on memorandum, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character -...
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,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070015569
The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived his right to an administrative separation board and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicants characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060005710
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 4 March 2005, 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 (abuse of illegal drugs "cocaine"), 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 honorable...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000462
Applicant Name: ????? The applicant waiver 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: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009993
The memorandum further indicates that the applicant's request was disapproved, and his defense counsel requested reconsideration of the applicant's request for separation in lieu of courts-martial. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080007747
Please allow me the honor again of working with the military. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 5 June 1996, 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 misconductfor continued patterns of misconduct, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change...