Application Receipt Date: 080317	

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: 070711
Discharge Received:     Date: 071109   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct, (Serious Offense)
RE:     SPD: JKQ
Unit/Location: A Trp, 1-89 CAV, APO AE 09322 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070621, GCM, disobeyed a lawful command from LTC, on or about (061229-070101), wrongfully retaining Iraqi Dinars for personal use between on or about (061001-061207), wrongfully possessed seized firearms between on or about (061001-061207), maltreatment of three Soldiers between on or about (060901-061207), with intent to deceive, made to a Maj, several false official statements (070106), assault x 2, between on or about (061101-061207), and  (060101-061101), negligently discharged a SKS rifle between (061101-061130), wrongfully discharged a sniper rifle (M-24), in a populated area to endanger human life between on or about (061101-061207), wrongfully communicated a threat to injure five Soldiers between on or about (061101-061207), wrongfully communicated a threat to a SGT, to injure a PFC by shooting him with sniper rifle between on or about (061101-061207), and wrongfully endeavored to influence the testimony of five Soldiers by threatening them between on or about (061101-061130).  Reduction to E-1, and hard labor without confinement for 90 days. 

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  780602  
Current ENL Date: 010620    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 06 Yrs, 04 Mos, 20 Days Item 12d on the applicant's DD Form 214 , total prior active service is incorrect, should read 00 Yrs, 04 Mos, 11 Days.
Total Service:  09  Yrs, 07 Mos, 06 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: ARNG-980724-981014/NA
                                      ADT-981015-990225/UNC
                                      ARNG-990226-990419/NA
                                      RA-990420-010619/HD
Highest Grade: E-6
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 19D10 Cavalry Scout   GT: 101   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea/Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (030901-041001) and (060813-071019)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM-2, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, KDSM, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR, CAB
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 10 July 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—commission of a serious offense, for between 1 October 2006 and 1 January 2007, disobeyed a no contact order from a LTC, stole currency from local nationals during raids, maltreated three Soldiers, made several false statements to a Maj, assault x 2, made several threats to his Soldiers to include killing them, obstructed justice by telling his Soldiers that "you better keep your mouth shut or else I'll slit your throats," fired an M 24 sniper rifle in sector under circumstances to endanger human life and negligently discharged a SKS rifle, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than honorable, 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 and senior commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 10 September 2007, the separation authority disapproved the applicant's conditional waiver and referred the his case to a Striker Administrative Separation Board.  The administrative separation board was appointed; the board met, applicant appeared with counsel, however, the findings and recommendations of the board are not part of the available record and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  On 9 October 2007, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendation of the administrative separation board 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 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. The analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful combat tours in Iraq.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  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: 17 June 2008              
Location: Chicago, IL

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: No

Witnesses/Observers: No 

Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted five additional pages of documents in support of his personal appearance hearing.




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, hearing his testimony 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 overall length and quality of the applicant’s service; to include 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 fully honorable.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was 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: 11 July 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080004279

Applicant Name:           
______________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 6 pages