Application Receipt Date: 06/09/21	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: Applicant states he received a general discharge because he lost his security clearance one year before the chapter was initiated.  He had the option to reclassify to another MOS but this would have required him to extend his time in the service and he chose not to do it.  He states he didn't know he would not receive an honorable discharge or he would have reclassified into another MOS.  He states he was an honor graduate at AIT, was a soldier of the month, and that he received several awards.  He submitted several documents that are enclosed. 

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: 010208
Discharge Received:     Date: 010404   
Chapter: 13    AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance
RE:     SPD: JHJ
Unit/Location: 414th Signal Company, APO AE  09028 (Mannheim) 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None in file; however, applicant was reduced to E-3 on 000225

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  720308  
Current ENL Date: 970403    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  9 months extension
Current ENL Service: 04 Yrs, 00 Mos, 02 Days ?????
Total Service:  04 Yrs, 00 Mos, 02 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31R10/Multichannel Transmission Operator   GT: 125   EDU: 13L   Overseas: Germany   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, 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 8 February 2001, 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, for having lost his security clearance with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  The unit commander indicated that on 11 October 1998 the applicant was arrested in Texas for driving while intoxicated (DWI).  He failed to pay the DWI fine and a warrant was subsequently issued for his arrest.  Furthermore, on 12 October 1999, he tested positive for cocaine on a unit urinalysis. He was advised of his rights.  On 13 February 2001, 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.  He acknowledged that the least favorable discharge he may receive was a general under honorable conditions.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  On 6 March 2001, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  

      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 discharge, under honorable conditions 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 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.  Therefore, the analyst determined that 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, D.C.

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 and voted to deny relief. 

Case report reviewed and verified by: Alejandro Champin, 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: 25 October 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060013373

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages