Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110021358
Original file (AR20110021358.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/10/06	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that she would like an upgrade of her discharge in order to make it easier to find employment.

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: 021001
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 021227   Chapter: 14-12c    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: HDC, 25th Bde Spt Bn, Fort Lewis, WA 

Time Lost: 150 days, AWOL (020120-020618), mode of return is unknown.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 020903, violation of Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion (020120-020618), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $552 for two months, 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 001031    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 08 Mos, 27 Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 11 Mos, 09 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 980819-001030/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92Y10/Unit Supply Spc   GT: 93   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Auburn, AL
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 1 October 2002, 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—commission of a serious offense, for absenting herself from her unit on 20 January 2002 with the intent to remain away permanently, remaining so absent in desertion until 18 June 2002, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  
       
       On 1 October 2002, the applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and did not submit a statement on her behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       On 18 December 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge 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 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 her service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By her serious misconduct (desertion), the applicant diminished the quality of her 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 about being easier to find a job with an honorable discharge; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined 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 March 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

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						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  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.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder
















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 AR20110021358
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090009445

    Original file (AR20090009445.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 11 June 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 Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013371

    Original file (AR20070013371.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant submitted her copy of the Commander’s notification memorandum indicating that on 19 April 2005, the Commander was initiating separation action under provisions of Chapter 14 for commission of a serious offense for her absence without leave (050207-050227) with a recommendation for an honorable characterization of service. Her DD Form 214 indicates that she was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12c by reason of misconduct, with a...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070015237

    Original file (AR20070015237.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 18 June 2002, 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 wrongful use of amphetamines and d-methamphetamines (020405-020422), with a general under honorable conditions discharge. On 26 June 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110000387

    Original file (AR20110000387.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090009823

    Original file (AR20090009823.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 5 March 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for pattern of misconduct in that she was AWOL (020703-020709) and failed to report on numerous occasions, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 23 March 2003, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013009

    Original file (AR20060013009.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of her case by an administrative separation board if she receives an honorable characterization of service, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf. 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 issue she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110013603

    Original file (AR20110013603.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 3 December 2002, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of a pattern of misconduct; in that he failed to be at his appointed place of duty on several occasions and counseled for dishonorably failing to pay his just debts, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 13 December 2002, the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013718

    Original file (AR20080013718.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 8 April 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-pattern of misconduct; in that he was AWOL x 2, from (040107-040108); and AWOL from (020618-020621); underage drinking; and failure to repair, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120017305

    Original file (AR20120017305.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 17 August 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue and document submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011275

    Original file (AR20080011275.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 9 August 2002, 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 receiving two Article 15s for making false official statements and forgery, counseled for leaving his place of duty and for other offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), he grossly disregards Army rules...