Application Receipt Date: 070205

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents.

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: 060502
Discharge Received:     Date: 060602
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern Of Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: 977th Military Police Company, 97th Military Police
Battalion, Fort Riley, KS 66442-5000

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060322-Without authority, fail to
go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 2, (060103) and
(060210); having received a lawful order from a SGT, willfully disobeyed
the same, (060213); dereliction of duty, (060215); with intent to deceive,
make a false official statement to a SGT x 2, (060228) and (060228); (Field
Grade).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  840809
Current ENL Date: 020814    Current ENL Term: 6 Years       
Current ENL Service: 03  Yrs, 09 Mos, 19 Days      
Total Service:  03  Yrs, 09 Mos, 19 Days      
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No
MOS: 31B10 Military Police   GT: 97   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas:
Germany/SouthWest Asia   Combat: Iraq (030305-0403040)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR (2)
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: Norwood, OH 45212
Current Address: 704 Brentwood Ct
Junction City KS 66441
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states he enlisted in the
United States Marine Corps on 12 September 2006, and is currently serving
in Iraq as a supply warehouseman.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 2 May 2006, 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 (on numerous occasions he was absent from his appointed place of
duty, disobeyed lawful orders frm NCOs , derelict in the performance of his
dutuies, and made false official statements), 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 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 of the separation action
with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 25 May 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,
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 during
the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he
submitted, 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, 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: 10 September 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 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 does not condone the applicant’s
misconduct; however, determined that the characterization of service was
too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  The Board found that the
overall length and quality of the applicant’s service; to include his
combat service, and his post service accomplishments, mitigated the
discrediting entries in his service record.   Accordingly, the Board voted
to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of
service to fully honorable.  However, the Board determined that the reason
for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.

















Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner

X.  Board Action Directed
No Change
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: None
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

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