Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100000510
Original file (AR20100000510.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/12/15	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he would love to receive his GI Bill so that he can start a truck driving school.

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: 081015
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 081028   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: Delta Company, 3rd Battalion, 69th Armor Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, Fort Stewart, GA 

Time Lost: AWOL x 2 from (021015-041213) for a total of 789 days; apprehended by the civilian authorities; confined by the military authorities from (041214-041219) for a total of 6 days; AWOL from (041219-080627) for a total of 1,095 days; apprehended by the civil authorities from (080628-080702) for a total of 10 days.  Total time lost was 1,900 days. 

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:  20
Current ENL Date: 000824    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 5 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 5 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 19K10 M1 Armor Crewman   GT: 91   EDU: GED Cert   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NATOMDL, 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 14 October 2008, 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 went AWOL from (021015-041213) and AWOL from (041219-080702), 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 17 October 2008, 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 received a Memorandum of Reprimand dated 12 March 2002 for driving under the influence of alcohol; failing to yield the right of way, and driving without a license (Administrative) 

       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, and the issue 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 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 applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. 
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he would love to receive his GI Bill, so that he can start a truck driving school.  Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.
       
       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: 15 September 2010         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 23 November 2009. 









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: 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 AR20100000510
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100021883

    Original file (AR20100021883.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? After a thorough review of the applicant’s record, the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommends to the Board to deny clemency. 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 Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120007429

    Original file (AR20120007429.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 2 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 (020617-020707), and stealing money orders (020514), the property of other persons, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 4 October 2002, the separation authority waived further...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100026268

    Original file (AR20100026268.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant’s discharge 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007962

    Original file (AR20090007962.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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 Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110011232

    Original file (AR20110011232.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 8 February 2022, the applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 14 February 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110001574

    Original file (AR20110001574.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 6 February 2003, 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 wrongfully used cocaine between (021015-021115), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 6 February 2003, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110024454

    Original file (AR20110024454.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    But she would like to believe that her mistake saved some Soldiers in her platoon, company, and unit from making the same mistake. On 2 June 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The analyst noted the applicant's issues about her desire to have better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120004253

    Original file (AR20120004253.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 27 July 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The analyst determined that 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100022924

    Original file (AR20100022924.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The unit commander recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120003123

    Original file (AR20120003123.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 26 May 2009, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.