Applicant Name: ?????

Application Receipt Date: 070718	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant.

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: 060418
Discharge Received:     Date: 060718   
Chapter: 14-12c    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)
RE:     SPD: JKQ
Unit/Location: C Co, 2-508 IN, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Year/Month:  8401  
HOR City, State: Springfield, MO
Current ENL Date: 050128    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05Mos, 20Days ?????
Total Service:  05 Yrs, 02Mos, 10Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 010509-040108/HD
                                     RA 040109-050127/HD
Highest Grade: E-5
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B2P Infantryman   GT: 100   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii    Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, NCOPD, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states he has completed his certifications as a firefighter ( see letter submitted by applicant).

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 18 April 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—for being confined on 30 January 2006 at the Hoke County Dentention Center for First Degree Burglary, 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 17 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.
      
      The file contains a letter of reprimand dated 12 January 2006.
      
      The file contains a arrest warrant from Hoke County NC dated 30 January 2006.

      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, however, a general 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 independent evidence he submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, and his post service accomplishments mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 080716              
Location: Washington DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: None




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 determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service and the circumstances surrounding his misconduct and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  

								        
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: 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: 080718
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070009949
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 5 pages