Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 070829 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: I served my enlistment term of 3 years and an additional five months. I was deployed to Iraq in disregard of my reenlistment contract. I was separated against my will. I have already been punished for my actions by court-martial. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 070628 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct, (Serious Offense) RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: HHC, 1st EN Bn, (Rear Det), Fort Riley, KS 66442 Time Lost: Confinement/Military Authority for 28 days (070306-070404) Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070603, SCM, dereliction of duty x 2 (061023) and (061023). Reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $1,039 x 1, and confinement for 30 days. Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Year/Month: 8508 HOR City, State: Pasadena, CA Current ENL Date: 040113 Current ENL Term: 3 Years The applicant extended for 30 months on 060502. Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 04 Mos, 17 Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 04 Mos, 17 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 21B10 Combat Engineer GT: 125 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (060901-070401) Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR V. Post-Discharge Activity Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense for being found guilty in summary court-martial of failing to stay in the proper uniform and sleeping at his post prior to being regularly relieved 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. 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 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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 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 his 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. 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: 20 August 2008 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change 0 No change 5 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - Reason (Board member names available upon request) IX. 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. X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 26 August 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070012112 ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 pages