Applicant Name:  XXXXXXX 

Application Receipt Date: 2011/10/19	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, he was a good Soldier who received several awards including two AAMs for outstanding service.  He accepts responsibility for his actions and poor judgment but feels that it was unjust to sum up his entire active duty career on his tardiness.  He has learned from his mistakes and now takes the necessary steps to prevent such behavior.  He rejoined the Army National Guard in October of 2010 and is doing well.

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: 980604
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 980615   Chapter: 13    AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance	   RE:     SPD: LHJ   Unit/Location: HHT, 5th Squadron, 15th Cavalry Regiment, Fort Knox, KY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 971218, failed to report (971211), forfeiture of $291 (suspended), 14 days of extra duty and restriction.  The suspended sentence of forfeiture of $291.00 was vacated on 26 February 1998 for another violation of failing to report to his designated place of duty (CG)

980305, failed to report two times (980215, 980219), reduction to E-3, 14 days of extra duty and restriction (CG)

980421, failed to report (980408), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $463.00 for two months, 45 days of restriction and extra duty (FG)

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  26
Current ENL Date: 971003    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 08 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 11 Mos, 01 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 940715-971002/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 19D10/Cavalry Scout   GT: 103   EDU: Associate's Degree   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM-2, AGCM, KDSM, ASR, OSR


V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Alexandria, VA
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant has been serving in the Army National Guard since 19 October 2010.



VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 30 April 1998, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance for a pattern of habitual tardiness, lack of self-discipline, motivation, commitment, and gross lack of responsibility and maturity which rendered him incompatible with military service, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 7 May 1998, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  
       
       On 4 June 1998, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was not transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group.

       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; however, a fully 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, the documents, and the issues submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.   
       
       The applicant contends that he was unjustly discharged, that he had good service and has rejoined the Army National Guard and is doing well.  However, in reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the applicant.   
       
       The applicant’s record of service was marred by numerous negative counseling’s and three Article 15s, for multiple violations of failing to report to his designated place of duty over an extended period of time.  The analyst determined 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.  The applicant, by his repeated incidents of misconduct knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  Moreover, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.      
       
       The applicant rejoined the Army National Guard and the ADRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, there is no law or regulation, which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on post discharge achievements.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board reviews. The analyst commends the applicant for taking responsibility for his actions and for doing well in the ARNG as he states; however, did not find such action sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge from active duty. 
       
       The analyst acknowledges the applicant's in service accomplishments as stated in his application.  However, the analyst did not find the said issue sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review because his service record was marred by three Articles 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.   
       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: 12 March 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 214

VIII.  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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.
        
IX.  Board Decision						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
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
Approval Authority:


EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board



BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder
?????



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 AR20110020958
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages