Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 070816	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   No

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 971210
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 971223   Chapter: 14       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHT, 3-3 ACR, Fort Carson, CO 80913 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 970811, failure to report (970603), disrespectful in deportment towards a SFC (970605), disrespectful in language towards a SFC (970605), disobeyed a lawful order from a SFC (970605), 45 days extra duty, forfeiture of $450 x 2 and restriction for 45 days both (suspended) (FG). 

970925, suspension of punishment of forfeiture of  $450 x 2 and restriction for 45 days was vacated for new offenses of failure to report x 2 (970922) and (970923).

970127, disrespectful in language towards a SGT (961212), reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $266 x 1, extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG).

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 951012    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 02Mos, 12Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 02Mos, 12Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 88M10 Motor Transport Operator   GT: 126   EDU: GED Cert   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Alfred, ME
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant claims he is employed by the Department of Navy at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.






VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       Evidence of record shows that on 9 December 1997, 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 for numerous failures to repair, repeated disrespect toward NCOs, indebtedness, and repeated failures to follow orders, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 9 December 1997, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service of no less favorable than general, under honorable. conditions 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.  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 applicant's record contains an approved Bar To Reenlistment dated 13 February 1997.
       

       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 and the issues 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.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue and found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  In view of the foregoing, 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: 10 September 2008         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




VIII.  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.  
        
IX.  Board Decision						XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 2    No change 3
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								EDGAR J. YANGER			 
Issue a new DD Form 214  					Colonel, U.S. Army
Change Characterization to: 			President, Army Discharge Review Board	  
Change Reason to:  
Other: NA										
RE Code: 									 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None


 
       	
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070011392
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages