Applicant Name: 

Application Receipt Date: 2008/02/27	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 149 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: 060608
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060705   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 1/61 Cav Regt, 101st Abn Div (AASLT), Camp Rustamiyah, Iraq. 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051212, disobey a lawful order from NCO (051203), disrespectful in deportment to NCO (051203), punishment NIF, (summarized)

060203, disobey a lawful order from a NCO (060115), reduction to E-2, $331 x 1, 14 days extra duty, 14 days restriction, (CG), on appeal the Battalion Commander directed a rehabilitation transfer after completion of punishment (060205).

060426, disobey a lawful order from a NCO (060414), disrespectful in language to a NCO (060416), reduction to E-1, $636 x 2 (suspended), 30 days extra duty, 30 days restriction, (FG)

060610, suspension of punishment of forfeiture of $636 x 2 was vacated for disrepectful language to CSM (060530).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  27
Current ENL Date: 041005    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  24 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 09 Mos, 01 Days ?????
Total Service:  		01 Yrs, 09 Mos, 01 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 74D/Chemical Operations Specialist   GT: 99   EDU: HS   Overseas: None   Combat: Iraq (051201-060620)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Ardmore, OK
Post Service Accomplishments: None provided





VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 8 June 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of a pattern of misconduct—On or about 7 April 2006 you were verbally disrespectful to a SFC and SSG, on 13 April 2006 you were disrespectful to and disobeyed a SGT, on 14 April 2006 you were disrespectful to a SSG and SGT, on 29 May 2006 you were not at your appointed place of duty and were verbally disrespectful to a SGT, on 29 May 2006 you were not at your appointed place of duty and were verbally disrespectful to a SGT, and on 20 May 2006 you were verbally disrespectful to a CSM, with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted 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 13 June 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, 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, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact the local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes.  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: 19 December 2008         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: None




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: No Change										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080004400
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages