Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2010/08/25 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that his unit treated him horribly because he was overweight and instead of helping him, they punished him continuously. He has a weight problem that runs in his family, and was an outcast and severly punished for it, and fellow Soldiers tried to physically hurt him at night because of it. He did everything asked of him, and all he could not pass was the run portion of the pt test. So no matter what he did, it was not good enough and went AWOL because he had no other choice. He wants to go to school and do something with his life and asking the board to help him to take a step forward. He does not want this over his head any longer. He went AWOL because it was his only option.
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: 090730
Discharge Received: Date: 090903 Chapter: 14-12c (1) AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (AWOL) RE: SPD: JKD Unit/Location: B Company, 2nd Battalion, 3rd Infantry Regiment, 3rd Brigade (SBCT), 2nd Infantry Division, Fort Lewis, WA
Time Lost: AWOL x 1 from (090303-090614) for 103 days. The applicant 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: 070731 Current ENL Term: 4 Years 19 weeks
Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 9 Mos, 21 Days ?????
Total Service: 1 Yrs, 9 Mos, 21 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 11B10 Infantryman GT: 105 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, 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 16 June 2009, 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 (090303-090615), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 29 July 2009, 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 31 July 2009, 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 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 applicants 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 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 his unit treated him horribly because he was overweight and instead of helping him, they punished him continuously; treated him as an outcast; severly punished him for it, and fellow Soldiers tried to physically hurt him at night because of it. The record does not support the applicants contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that his unit treated him any different than other Soldiers who successfully completed there military obligation. Further, 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.
The applicant further contends that he would like to go to school and do something with his life, and asking the board to help him to take a step forward. 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. 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: 6 May 2011 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: None
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 10 July 2010.
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 AR20100022588
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100007099
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 8 April 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense; in that he received an Article 15 on (090331) for being AWOL from (090110-090317), willfully disobeying a commissioned officer and for testing positive for marijuana on (090126 and again on (090303), with a...
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120010740
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 18 June 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct for commission of a serious offense for going AWOL (080922-081230), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The Board determined that the overall length and quality of the applicants service, to include his combat...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090010648
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 3 February 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12a, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductcommission of a serious offense for being AWOL (080806-081205), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 11 February 2009, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110012128
Applicant Name: ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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 | CY2010 | AR20100025684
Applicant Name: ????? 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 discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080015309
Applicant Name: ????? On 13 March 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 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 | CY2011 | AR20110020454
Applicant Name: ????? On 7 February 2011, 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.
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100008532
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 26 January 2009, 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 been disrespectful in language toward a noncommissioned officer and a warrant officer (080212), failing to report to his appointed place of duty x 6 (080227, 080409, 080411, 080825, 080911, and 080920), and...
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120007188
Applicant Name: ????? On 23 October 2009, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)", the separation code is "JKQ", and the reentry code is "RE 3".
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120003703
Applicant Name: ????? c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and the issues and documents submitted with the application, the analyst determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge and or a change to the narrative reason for discharge on the applicant's DD Form 214. ...