Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 080104	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: "The applicant states that at the time of my release, I asked my CO to be discharged because I was young and immature and didn't have any respect for my future or the people in it. I also feel that in the troubled times I was experiencing, I let my anger interfere with the best job that I could have done and it did not and does not represent the person that I have become today.  Of particular concern to me and what prompted me to ask to be discharged from service was a certain time that in a Court Martial preceding with over 5 witnesses at my side including a recommendation from my platoon Sgt. and pictures of an assault on me by a particular Sgt., I was still found to be "guilty" in which I feel it was a case of protecting "their own" and using myself as an expendable item.  Anyhow, I attributed that to my drop in performance and disrespect for the military at the time because as I said I was yound and lacked any type of professional courtesy. In my defense, prior to the degradation of performance due to this incident, I particpated as the company flag bearer in most retirement ceremonies, the CO's driver, and the First Sgt. driver.  Along with my maturity in life, I have made postive impacts on the community around me especially in the recommendation by the Buffalo Police in a community watch program that I particpated in which helped local teens stay off the streets and out of trouble.  I owe alot to the military in the fact that when I had no place to go and was on a path to a dead end road, they took me in a gave me the discipline I needed and a sense of belonging.  I truly regret the decisons I made at a young and impressionable age and hope I will be able to have a positive eye turned towards me.  Thank-you for your consideration."

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 940215
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 940301   Chapter: 13     AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance	   RE:     SPD: JHJ   Unit/Location: 24th Ord Co, Fort Stewart, GA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 931119, dereliction of duty (931013), reduction to E-2 (suspended), 7 days extra duty (CG).

940126, suspension of punishment of reduction to E-2 was vacated for new offense, EO complaint and incident in the barracks. 

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): The applicant stated in his issues that he received a court-martial; however, the document is not part of the available record.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 920129    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 01Mos, 05Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 00Mos, 25Days Item 12e on the applicant's DD Form 214, total prior inactive service is incorrect, should read 00 Yrs, 08 Mos, 20Days
Previous Discharges: 	ARNG-910207-910312/NA
                                       ADT-910313-910614/HD
                                       ARNG-910615-920128/HD
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 55B10 Ammunition Spec   GT: 123   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Plantation, FL
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 11 February 1994, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance for extensive counseling for numerous disciplinary infractions; to include failure to pay just debts (DPP), failure to report, disobeyed lawful orders, writing bad checks, and received a Company Grade Article 15 and a vacation of suspended punishment to no avail, with an honorable 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.   On 15 February 1994, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR).

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.  Army policy states that a general discharge, under honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate, but an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.

       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 issues and document he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incidents of unsatisfactory performance.  The analyst determined that 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 unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the aplicant's issue and determined that he met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.  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: 29 October 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 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
								         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 									 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070018956
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages