Application Receipt Date: 2006/10/06	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: Applicant states he was punished twice for the same offense.  He received an article 15 for his offense and was discharged with a general discharge for the same reason.  He says that he was unjustly punished with extra duty and loss of pay.  The discharge was additional punishment about which he was not briefed prior to completing the process.  The applicant submitted a letter of recommendation from a 2LT, platoon leader and is attached to his request.  ?????

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: 010618
Discharge Received:     Date: 010712   
Chapter: 14, paragraph 12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: HHC/249th General Hospital, Fort Gordon, GA 30905 

Time Lost: 19 days, AWOL x 2 (000615-000617, 000821-000905)

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 

000925, AWOL (000821-000906), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $500 (suspended), 32 days extra duty, 32 days restriction (FG)

991217, shoplifting an item valued of $8.00 (990911), reduction to 
E-1, 14 days extra duty (CG)

990603, wrongfully altered an ID card, forfeiture of $251.00, 14 days extra duty (CG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  800718  
Current ENL Date: 980723    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 11 Mos, 01 Days ?????
Total Service:  02 Yrs, 11 Mos, 01 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31U10/Signal Support Specialist   GT: 98   EDU: HS grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: 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:
      Evidence of record shows that on 18 June 2001, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct for being arrested off-post for driving under the influence, for numerous incidents of failure to report on time to his appointed place of duty, and for having received three article 15s for being AWOL, for larceny, and for altering his ID card.  The unit commander recommended a general under honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was advised of his rights.  He 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 25 July 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 discharge.
      
      

      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 issue he submitted and the statement from his platoon leader, 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 analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  Furthermore, evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of nonjudicial punishment.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.  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 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, 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: 30 November 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060014164

Applicant Name:  Mr.    
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages