Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2009/11/12 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was improper because he was discharged on one incident in his 22 months of service and was characterized as pattern of misconduct. He has learned from his mistakes in the past and would be very appreciative, if he could reenlist in the US Army.
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: 071128
Discharge Received: Date: 080414 Chapter: 14-12c AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense) RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: E Battery, 5th Battalion, 52nd Air and Missile Defense, 11th Air Defense Artillery Brigade, Fort Bliss, TX.
Time Lost: Civil confinement from (070904-070907) for a total of 4 days. The applicant was returned to his unit.
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: 18
Current ENL Date: 0606022 Current ENL Term: 4 Years 17 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 9 Mos, 19 Days ?????
Total Service: 1 Yrs, 9 Mos, 19 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 92Y10 Unit Supply Spec GT: 95 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 20 November 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense; in that he violated a written lawful order and any other misconduct; by wrongfully possessing an unregistered firearm on (070917), 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 12 December 2007, the separation authority suspended the discharge until 1 December 2008 (not to exceed 12 months), at which time this action if not executed will be remitted in accordance with AR 635-200, paragraph 1-18.
On 3 April 2008, the separation authority vacated the suspension of the discharge, which was suspended on 12 December 2007, based on the applicant's conduct during the suspension period and he has proven that he has no further potential for rehabilitation, 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 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 analyst determined that 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 the 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.
The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he was discharged on one incident in his 22 months of service and was characterized as a pattern of misconduct, and he would be very appreciative, if he could reenlist in the US Army. The applicant was discharged by reason of misconduct, commission of a serious offense (i.e., wrongfully possessing an unregistered firearm) under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14.
Even though a single incident, the analyst concluded that the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.
Having examined all the circumstances, the analyst determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.
Additionally, if the applicant desires to reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his eligibility to reenlist. Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes.
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: 27 August 2010 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: None
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 24 October 2009.
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: No Change
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change
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 AR20090019996
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100010797
The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than an honorable discharge and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The board recommended that the applicant be discharged from the service with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, however, the board recommended that...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070017673
Applicant Name: ????? On 12 April 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. 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 President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011240
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 5 January 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 12(C)2, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct drug abuse, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090014629
Applicant Name: ????? On 25 September 2007, 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110022649
Applicant Name: ????? Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 110523 Discharge Received: Date: 110629 Chapter: 14, SEC II AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (Civil Conviction) RE: SPD: JKB Unit/Location: B Company, 296th BSB, Fort Lewis, WA Time Lost: Civil Confinement for 4 days (101205-101208). On 7 June 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090010003
Applicant Name: ????? Chapter 3, Section IV, establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was adjudged guilty by a court-martial and that the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080019512
The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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. Board...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008290
The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 4 December 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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change...
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110002559
On 23 January 2002, 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. On 24 January 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000864
On 5 March 2002, 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 proper and equitable and...