Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090014539
Original file (AR20090014539.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/08/24	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states: "My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 23 months of service with no other adverse action."

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: 960613
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 960802   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHC, 1/8th Cav, 1st Cav Div, Fort Hood, TX 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 940816    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 11Mos, 17Days ?????
Total Service:  		01 Yrs, 11Mos, 17Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 77F10/Petroleum Supply Sp   GT: 94   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

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

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       Evidence of record shows that on 13 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 pattern of misconduct for having violated Article 86, UCMJ (FTR), Article 92, UCMJ (Disobeying a noncommissioned officer), and repeated violation of Article 134, UCMJ (Failure to pay debts), 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.  On 27 June 1996, 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, but a general discharge 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 and the issues he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The applicant’s 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 applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 23 months of service with no other adverse action.  However, even though the applicant claims that his offenses were isolated, the analyst determined 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.
       
       In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the characterization of service and reason for discharge 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: 7 July 2010         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 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						
	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: NA



































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 AR20090014539
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090012946

    Original file (AR20090012946.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application Receipt Date: 2009/07/20 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. On 29 May 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. 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,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007524

    Original file (AR20090007524.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable 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: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000698

    Original file (AR20090000698.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 4 January 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 receiving a Company Grade Article 15 (931123), and three negative counseling statements (930908), (930907), and (930906), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008413

    Original file (AR20090008413.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 13 July 2001, the separation authority approved the conditional waiver request, 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 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007164

    Original file (AR20090007164.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 16 October 2002, 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 being AWOL (020731-020813) and failed to be at her appointed place of duty (020814) with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100012755

    Original file (AR20100012755.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 29 March 1999, 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 (980708) for being absent from his unit without authority; receiving a Company Grade Article 15 (981102) for being absent from his unit without authority; and receiving a Field Grade Article 15...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016208

    Original file (AR20060016208.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that 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 testing positive for the wrongful use of marijuana (020221-020320, assault (020422) and AWOL(020702-020728 and (020731-020813), with a under other than honorable condictions discharge. The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070015573

    Original file (AR20070015573.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 12 January 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense for being counseled numerous times for substandard performance; received a Summarized Article 15 for disobeying a lawful order (980925); and received a Field Grade Article 15 for driving drunk (981221), with a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110012673

    Original file (AR20110012673.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 28 September 2010, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed 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 the applicant was aware of it prior to requesting discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100014022

    Original file (AR20100014022.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 June 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. The analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances...