Application Receipt Date: 080310	

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: 060310
Discharge Received:     Date: 060412   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern Of Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: HHC, 1-27 IN, Schofield Barracks, HI 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): It appears that the applicant was reduced in grade from E-4 to E-1, however, the document that reduced him is not part of the available record.

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): No

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  810801  
Current ENL Date: 020103    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 04  Yrs, 02 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Total Service:  04  Yrs, 02 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10 Infantryman   GT: 123   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii/Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (040111-050111)
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, OSBB-2, CIB
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Oklahoma City OK 73102
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 10 March 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—pattern of misconduct for failure to report to the accountability formation x 4 (050519), (050915), (050916), and (051102); drunk on duty (050630), and failed to report for work at 0930 x 2 (050629) and (050914), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant waived consulting with 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 16 March 2006, 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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to fully honorable.  The analyst does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The analyst found that the length of the applicant's service; to include his combat service, and the independent medical documentation from the VA Medical Center, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 9 April 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 4    No change 1   - 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 is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board determined that the length 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: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: NA
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 10 April 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080003804

Applicant Name:    
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 5 pages