Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2010/09/02 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicat states, in effect, that she would like an upgrade so that she could get her GI Bill and finish her education. She has started taking classes and all she is waiting for is the confirmation in reference to her GI Bill. If she doesn't get the GI Bill, she would have to get a student loan and she wouldn't be able to pay it back. 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: 080324 Discharge Received: Date: 080328 Chapter: 14-12c AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct ( Serious Offense) RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: 1st Maintenance Company, 541st Combat Sustainment Support Battalion, Fort Riley, KS Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080111, through neglect damaged a Chevrolet Impala of a value more than $500.00, the property of the US (071111), and operated a passenger car while drunk (071111), reduction to Private (E-2), forfeiture of $729.00 pay, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (080711) and extra duty for 45 days (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: Reenl/070406 Current ENL Term: NIF Years ????? Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 11 Mos, 23 Days ????? Total Service: 3 Yrs, 0 Mos, 4 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA 050325-070405/HD Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92A10 Automated Logistical Spec GT: 82 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (060818-070818) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICMDL, ASR, OSR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant stated in her issue that she has started taking classes. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 24 March 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 she had a DUI on post, received a Field Grade Article 15 for destruction of government property; driving under the influence, arrested by the Junction City Police Department for driving on a suspended license, driving under the influence and missed several formations. The unit commander recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. She was advised of her rights. On 27 March 2008, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in her 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. 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 General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand for driving under the influence of alcohol dated 5 March 2008, and a Military Police Report in reference to the applicant's offense of drunken driving, traffic accident with a government vehicle, and driving on a laned roadway, dated 11 November 2007. 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 the misconduct, 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 that she would like to get her GI Bill and finish her education. The analyst considered the applicant’s quality of service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge. Further, 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: 11 May 2011 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 24 August 2010. 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 AR20100022924 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages