Application Receipt Date: 060613	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293 and supporting 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: NIF
Discharge Received:     Date: 060221   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct, (Serious Offense)
RE:     SPD: JKQ
Unit/Location: B Troop, 5th Battalion, 73d Cavalry Regiment, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: Applicant was confined by military authorities for a total of 21 days from (051203-051223), as a result of his Summary Court-Martial (051201).

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

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): Summary Court-Martial/051201/Dereliction of duty in that he by culpable inefficiency failed to notify a noncommissioned officer or commissioned officer in his chain of command of his current location, duty status, and appointments, as it was his duty to do between on or about (051002) to (071107)/He was sentenced to a reduced to the grade of private/E1, forfeiture of $823.00 for one month, and confinement for 30 days, which was change to 29 days so the applicant would not have to spend Christmas in confinement.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  730921  
Current ENL Date: 030415    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 09Mos, 16Days ?????
Total Service:  02 Yrs, 09Mos, 16Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B1P (Infantryman)   GT: NIF   EDU: NIF   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, Parachutist Badge
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:
      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 (derelict in the performance of his duties by failing to notify a noncommissioned officer or commissioned officer of his current location, duty status, and appointments as it was his duty to do), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant's election of rights are not contained in the available record, and the analyst is presuming Government Regularity in the discharge process.  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 23 January 2006, 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, 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, and the documents he submitted the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the chain of command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Furthermore, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicat'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 reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 20 June 2007              
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 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 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 determined that the applicant's overall length of service and the circumstances surrounding his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  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: Eric S. Moore, 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: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 28 June 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060008492

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages