Application Receipt Date: 070405	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293.

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: 030708
Discharge Received:     Date: 030714   
Chapter: 13    AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance
RE:     SPD: JHJ
Unit/Location: A Company, 1st Battalion, 13th Aviation Regiment, 1st Aviation Brigade, Fort Rucker, AL  36362-5082 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 030424/Disobeying a lawful command from a Drill Sergeant (SSG) to turn in his TV, play station, games and movies, and return the day room chairs/(Company Grade).

2nd Article 15/030521/Failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on or about (030506)/(Company Grade).

3rd Article 15/030619/Failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty X 5, on or about (030514, 030515, 030516, 030524, and 030527)/(Company Grade).

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:    
Current ENL Date: 020702    Current ENL Term: 05 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 00Mos, 13Days ?????
Total Service:  01 Yrs, 00Mos, 13Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E2
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 124   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 8 July 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l3, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance (receiving three Article 15s for the following offenses; disobeying a lawful command from a drill sergeant on13 April 2003; failure to be at his appointed place of duty 6 May 2003, and failure to be at his appointed place of duty 14, 16, 24 and 27 May 2003; displayed an apathetic attitude, demonstrated unruly and disruptive behavior characteristics by continued disciplinary infractions and disrespect for noncommissioned officers and was counseled on several occasions), with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant waived consultation 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..  On 9 July 2003, the separation authority 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 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.  Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, but an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.

      c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
      After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issues he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incidents of unsatisfactory performance.  The evidence of record shows that command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of nonjudicial punishment.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.  The analyst determined that 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 unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service.  Furthermore, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both both proper and equitable. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 15 October 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: Yes [redacted]

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: None

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 4    No change 1   - 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 determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board found that the circumstances surrounding the applicant's discharge mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  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: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 

CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 30 October 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE