Application Receipt Date: 060825	

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: 990329
Discharge Received:     Date: 990414   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: A Company, 44th Engineer Battalion, Engineer Brigade, 2d Infantry Division APO AP 96251 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 981125/Disobeying a lawful command from two noncommissioned officers (SSG and SGT) on or about (981114)/(Company Grade) 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  780723  
Current ENL Date: 970930    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 06Mos, 15Days ?????
Total Service:  01 Yrs, 06Mos, 15Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E2
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 12B10 (Combat Engineer)   GT: 112   EDU: GED   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR, OSR
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 on 29 March 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct (violation of a written pass policy on two occasions, insubordinate to and disobeyed the orders of noncommissioned officers on two occasions, late for duty, failed to go to his appointed place of duty on one occasion, past due on payments of his DPP Account, and was involved in an assault while under the influence of alcohol which cause him to be reported on the blotter report for drunk and disorderly conduct), 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 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 1 April 1999, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  
      
      The applicant has a Military Police Report dated 18 January 1999, in his Official Military Personnel File.

      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, the discharge is improper.  The analyst noted that the unit commander used “Board Procedures” when notifying the applicant that he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct.  By using “Board Procedures” the authority for approval of the applicant’s separation rested with the General Court-Martial Convening Authority.  The evidence of record shows that someone other than the General Court-Martial Convening Authority approved the applicant’s discharge.  In view of the foregoing, the discharge was improper.  Accordingly, full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority is recommended to the Board.  This action does not entail a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code; however, the Board can consider it.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 29 August 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 5    No change 0   - 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 discharge was and is improper.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority.  This action does not entail a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code. 



















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: Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Chapter 5, AR 635-200
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: 20 September 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060012075

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages