Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/02/15	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant 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?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 060807
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070131   Chapter: 14-12c      AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: 62nd ENG Bn, 36th Eng Bde, Ft Hood, Tx 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050815, on/about (050709) stole a memory stick, valued at $18 property of AAFES, reduction to E-4 suspended, remitted is not vacated before 051115, forfeiture of $18.00 for one month, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG). 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  38
Current ENL Date: 040222    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 05Mos, 10Days ?????
Total Service:  		08 Yrs, 04Mos, 28Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 980903-040221/HD
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 88M20/Motor Transport Operator   GT: 98   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (030401-040401)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOMx2, AGCM, NDSM, NOPDR, ASR, GWOTEM, GWOTSM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 7 August 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 Serious Misconduct including; guilty for DWI, stealing from AAFES on two occassions, substantiated child abuse charges and disrespect to a commissioned officer, with an other than honorable characterization of service.   He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested his right to 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 Administrative Separation Board convened on 8 November 2006 and recommended that the applicant be discharged with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  The Board also recommended that the discharge be suspended for a period of 90 days.  On 4 January 2007, the separation authority approved the separation action except for the suspension, waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions no later than 10 working days of his approval date.
       
       The Record contains:
       Military Police Report dated 21 December 2000 for DWI and Open Container
       Military Police Report dated 09 June 2005 for Shoplifting from AAFES
       Department of Social Work, Family Advocate Service substantiated case for mild child abuse dated 10 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 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 while in Iraq and the applicant did not provide any corroborating evidence of the aforementioned medical issues.  The analyst noted the applicant’s issue and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. Therefore, 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: 5 December 2008         Location: Washington, D. C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: No

Witnesses/Observers: No 

Exhibits Submitted: No

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
X.  Board Action Directed					         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: ?????
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080002721
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 3 pages