Case Number AR20070015156

Applicant Name:

Application Receipt Date: 071025	

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: 041106
Discharge Received:     Date: 050112   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKQ
Unit/Location: HHC, 2-5 IN BN, Schofield Barracks, HI 

Time Lost: The applicant's DD Form 214 makes reference to the applicant having lost time during the period (041208-041219), however, there were no documents found in the available records to support this claim.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040715, disrespectful towards a superior commissioned officer and disobeying a lawful command on (040704) and willfully wrote Catholic Prayer in Protestant Prayer Books on (040707), reduction to the E1, forfeiture of $596.00 pay per month for two months, extra duty for 45 days, and restriction for 45 days (FG). 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  800501  
Current ENL Date: 030220    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 10Mos, 11Days ?????
Total Service:  01 Yrs, 10Mos, 11Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E5
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10/Infantryman   GT: 129   EDU: 16 Yrs   Overseas: Hawaii, Southwest Asia   Combat: Afghanistan (040428-041201)
Decorations/Awards: OSR, GWOTSM, GWOTEM, NDSM, ASR, OSR, CIB
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 6 November 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense for being disrespectful in language towards a noncommission officer (SGT) on (040601), disobeying two noncommissioned officers (SFC and SSG) on (040601) and (SSG) on (040602), showed disrespect towards a commander and disobeying a command on (040707), willfully damaged military property (040707), disobeyed his superior commissioned officer (LTC) on (040715), failed to report to his appointed place of duty on (040803), willfully damaged military property (040913), disobey a superior commissioned officer (LTC) on (040921), and struck a noncommissioned officer (SGT) on (040928), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, 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 commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge  On 12 November 2004, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than 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, documents, 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 or general, under honorable conditions 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 found no documentation in the applicant's record to support any claim of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant that his discharge was the result of any medical condition.  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: 19 December 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 determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board determined that the circumstances surrounding the applicant discharge and his combat service, 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 general, under honorable conditions.  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: Eric S. Moore, 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: 27 December 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

      
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 6 pages