Application Receipt Date: 070208	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents.

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: 050713
Discharge Received:     Date: 051020   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct, Commission Of A Serious Offense
RE:     SPD: JKQ
Unit/Location: B Company, 84th Engineer Combat Battalion (Heavy), Schofield Barracks, HI 96857 

Time Lost: Confinement Military Authority-13 days, from (050531-050614), as a result of summary court-martial conviction.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050531/Summary Court-Martial-Did treat with contempt a 1SG, (050404), and disrupted morning accountability formation, whose conduct was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, (050404).  The applicant was sentenced to confinement for 14 days; reduction to PVT/E1; and forfeiture of $823.00 pay.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:   
Current ENL Date: 030409    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 02  Yrs, 05 Mos, 28 Days ?????
Total Service:  02  Yrs, 05 Mos, 28 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 21K1O Plumber   GT: 100   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii/SouthWest Asia   Combat: Iraq (040116-050131)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, C/Ach (2), COT (3)
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant is attending Portland Community College and pursuing a Bachelor Degree in multi-media and computer science.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 13 July 2005, 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 (treated a 1SG with contempt, (4 April 2005), disrupted morning accountability formation, (4 April 2005), failed to report to Wheeler Army Airfield at 0900, (24 May 2005), and failed to report to PT formation at 0600, (25 May 2005), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant waived his right to consult 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  The senior commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.   On 28 September 2005, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than 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, but a general discharge 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 recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the length of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, nature of the offenses, and his post service accomplishments mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. 
 
VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 10 September 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: Yes [redacted]

Witnesses/Observers: No 

Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted six additional documents in support of his personal appearance hearing. 

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 5    No change 0   - 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, hearing his testimony, and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board found that the applicant’s combat service and the circumstances surrounding his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.   Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  
 
Case report reviewed and verified by: , Examiner									        
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: 20 September 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE