Application Receipt Date: 2006/09/13	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: Applicant states he was supposed to get a medical discharge.  He states his packet went through the processing channels and obtained all required signatures, but he was unable to go to Med Hold because he was a victim of an attack and had to wait for the trial.  He states that his P3 profile was changed to P2 during that time without an evaluation or his knowledge.  He was then discharged and told to deal with VA and that if he submit his paperwork to the ADRB, the Board would change his GD to HD.  

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: 2005/12/16
Discharge Received:     Date: 2006/02/28   
Chapter: 14-12c    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct, Serious Offense
RE:     SPD: JKQ
Unit/Location: HHC, 1st Bn, 32d Inf Regiment, Ft Drum, NY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): (1) Company Grade Art 15 on 23 November 2004 for disobeying a lawful order (information obtained from commander's notification memo; DA Form 2627 not in his file).

(2) Company Grade Art 15 on 21 March 2005 for disrespectful in language and disobeying a lawful order (information obtained from commander's notification memo; DA Form 2627 not in his file).

(3) Field Grade Art 15 on 13 October 2005 for failure to go to his place of duty (26 July 2005 and 4 August 2005); disobeying a lawful order, disrespect in deportment, and dereliction of duty  (4 August 2005; resisting arrest (3 August 2005); false official statement (27 July 2005); malingering  (4 August 2005); and drunk and disorderly conduct (3 August 2005).  He was reduced to E1.

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  1982/09/23  
Current ENL Date: 2004/03/23    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  19 weeks (extended 2 extra months on 28 September 2004--new ETS 2 October 2007))
Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 11Mos, 6Days (Net service is incorrect on DD214)
Total Service:  1 Yrs, 11Mos, 6Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92Y10 (Unit Supply Spec)   GT: 85   EDU: HS diploma   Overseas: No   Combat: No
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
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 16 December 2005 the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct, commission of a serious offense (Field Grade Art 15 on 13 October 2005 for failure to report, disobeying a lawful order, disrespect in deportment, dereliction of duty, resisting arrest, false official statement, malingering, and drunk and disorderly conduct; Company Grade Art 15 on 21 March 2005 for disrespectful in language and disobeying a lawful order; Company Grade Art 15 on 23 November 2004 for disobeying a lawful order) with a general discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  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 service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval with a general discharge.  On 26 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, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is 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 issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant'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 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: 24 October 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 0    No change 5   - 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 discharge was both proper and equitable.  The Board found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The Board 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 U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges.  Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge.  Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.  The Defense Discharge Review Standards specifically state that no factors should be established that requires automatic change or denial of a change in discharge.  The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.  

Case report reviewed and verified by: Esmeralda Proctor, 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: ?????

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

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

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 26 October 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060013023

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages