Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/12/30 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 149 the applicant submitted in lieu of DD Form 293 and attached documents. 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: 081121 Chapter: 14-12c AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense) RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: B Co, 2/108th Inf, Fort Bragg, NC Time Lost: AWOL x 1 for 12 days (080614-080625), mode of return unknown. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080814, AWOL (080614-080625), reduction to E2; forfeiture of $917.00 a month for two months, (FG). 080924, Found drunk in his room (080918); found drunk when reporting for his ASAP appointment (080915); making a false official statement to a noncommissioned officer (080911); and found drunk while reporting to his ASAP appointment (080911), reduction to E3; forfeiture of $600.00 pay per month for two (2) months (suspended); and 45 days extra duty (FG). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 23 Current ENL Date: 070927/OAD Current ENL Term: 01 Year 35 Days Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 01Mos, 25Days ????? Total Service: 04 Yrs, 03Mos, 02Days ????? Previous Discharges: ARNG-040820-041010/NA ADT-041011-050211/HD ARNG-050212-070926/NA (Concurrent Service) Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11B10/Infantryman GT: NIF EDU: GED Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Afghanistan (071222-080921) Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ACM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, AFRM (w/M Device) V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Dekalb Junction, NY Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 15 October 2008, 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 disobeying a direct order, drunk on duty x 3, and making false official statements, 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 submitted a statement in his own behalf which was not found in the available records. 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 28 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. 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 documents, and the issues 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. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issues; however, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The analyst determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. Further, reference the applicant's issue of being recommended for separation under provisions of Chapter 5-17, AR 635-200, the evidence of record shows that the applicant received a Article 15 for disobeying a direct order, drunk on duty x 3, and making false official statements, and was subsequently recommended for administrative separation action under the provisions Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense. Additionally, reference the applicant's issues of correcting his DD Form 214 to reflect Disability Retirement and the adding of the Combat Infantry Badge. These correction do not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), utilizing DD Form 149 regarding these issues. An application for that Board can be obtained on line or from the Veterans Administration. Finally, the analyst acknowledges the independent documents submitted with the application indicating that the applicant was diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); however, the applicant's available record does not contain any evidence of inservice diagnosis of PTSD as indicated in the independent documentation and the applicant did not submit any corroborating evidence of inservice diagnosis of PTSD or related medical issues. In view of the foregoing, 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: 1 February 2010 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA 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: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090001699 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages