Application Receipt Date: 071207	

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: 070122
Discharge Received:     Date: 070214   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: B Battery, 2nd Battalion, 11th Field Artillery, Schofield Barracks, HI 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060316, Failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (060221), disobeying a lawful command from a General Officer, drunk and disorderly, and breaking restriction (060217), reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $200.00, 14 days extra duty, and 14 days restriction (suspended) (CG).

061208, Failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty  X 2 (061118 and 061127), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $636.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), 30 days extra duty, and 30 days restriction (FG) 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  841225  
Current ENL Date: 050308    Current ENL Term: 05 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 11Mos, 07Days ?????
Total Service:  03 Yrs, 10Mos, 12Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-030403-050307/HD
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13D10/Field Artillery Automated Tactical Data System Specialist   GT: 94   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii, Southwest Asia   Combat: Afghanistan (040324-050323)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, 
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 22 January 2007, 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 failure to go to his appointed place of duty (060221), willfully disobeyed a lawful command from a Major General not to have contact with his spouse, drunk and disorderly, and breaking restriction (060217), and failure to go to his appointed place of duty X 2 (061118 and 061127), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant waived 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 January 2007, 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, documents, and the issue 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 file was void of any evidence of PTSD or injuries sustained by the applicant and the applicant did not provide any corroborating evidence of the aforementioned medical issues.  Addtionally, the analyst noted the applicant's issue, however, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.  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: 6 February 2008              
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 result it is inequitable.  The Board found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge, 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: 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: 7 February 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070017869

Applicant Name:  
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 5 pages