Application Receipt Date: 2006/10/03	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: Upgrade requested due to severity of case and time since discharge.  I will like to possibly rejoin military in future.

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: 040115
Discharge Received:     Date: 040128   
Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA 
Unit/Location: 178th Maintenance Company, 2d Battalion, 1st Air Defense Artillery, Fort Bliss, TX 79916 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 
031218/ Company Grade; Disrespect to a noncommissioned officer (031204); reduced to E3, $356 x 1 mo (suspended), 14 days extra duty, 14 days restriction, written reprimand.  

010907/ Company Grade; Failing to report (010727) and uttering checks with insufficient funds x4 (010507, 010510, 010518, 010525); reduced to E3, 14 days extra duty(suspended), 14 days restriction(suspended).

001129/ Company Grade Summarized Art 15; absent without leave (001019-001022)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  781007  
Current ENL Date: 000803      Current ENL Term:   5  Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 03   Yrs,  06   Mos,  04 Days ?????
Total Service:   05 Yrs,   00Mos,   12 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 990125-000802  HD
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 52C10  Utility Equipment Repairer   GT: 120   EDU: HS Grad      Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: SWA (010111-010615 / 021128-030515)
Decorations/Awards: ASR / NDSM / OSR / AAM/ ARCOMx2 / AFEM/ NCOPDR
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 15 January 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—disrespect to a noncommissioned officer (031204), failing to report to place of duty (010727), uttering checks without sufficient funds x 4 (010507, 010510, 010518, 010525), and being absent without leave (001019-001022), with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant waived the opportunity to consult with legal counsel 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 25 January 2002, 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 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.  Further, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  If the applicant desires to reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his eligibility to reenlist.  Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes.  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: 28 November 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 and voted to deny relief.  

Case report reviewed and verified by: Edgar Yanger, 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: 30 November 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060014126

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages