Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/03/28	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he was too immature to handle his position in the Army. After many years of consideration and regret, he has decided to correct his actions and rejoin the military. He wants to earn an honorable discharge.  

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: 020423
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 020712   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: Company A, 308th Military Intelligence Battalion, 902nd Military Intelligence Group, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 011107, Failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 2, (011016); (011014); and willfully disobeyed a lawful order from a CW3 (011011); forfeiture of $142.00 pay, extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG)

020227, Violated a lawful general regulation by wrongfully using a government credit card for non-official business between (011203-020107); failed to obey a lawful order issued by a CPT x 3, (020105); (010524); (010524); and failed to go to his appointed place of duty (020114); (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 990618    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 0 Mos, 25 Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 0 Mos, 25 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 97B10 CI Agent   GT: 104   EDU: HS Ltr   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, ASR

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

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       Evidence of record shows that on 23 April 2002, 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, in that he received a Company Grade Article 15 on (021107) for failing to report to his appointed place of duty on two separate instances, and willful disobedience of a lawful order given by a chief warrant officer, and on (020227) received a Field Grade Article 15 for wrongful misuse of a government credit card, failing to go to his appointed place of duty, and failure to obey a lawful written order on three accounts, which shows the lack of discipline to be a productive soldier and demonstrated a lack of motivation and inability to respond to counseling, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 9 May 2002, 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service with an under other than honorable conditions discharge and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 13 May 2002, the unit commander recommended disapproval of the applicant's request for a conditional waiver, and that the separation action be sent to an administrative separation board, and if the request is approved, that the service be characterized as general, under honorable conditions.  On 28 May 2002, the intermediate commander concurred with the unit commanders recommendation.  On 4 June 2002, the senior intermediate commander recommended disapproval of the applicant's request for a conditional waiver and that the separation action be sent to an administrative separation board and that he receive an under other than honorable characterization of service.  On 19 June 2002, the separation approving authority disapproved the applicant's request for a conditional waiver and referred the separation action to an administrative separation board.  On 20 June 2002, the applicant was notified to appear before a Board of Officers and advised of his rights.  On 24 June 2002, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and in doing so, understood that the convening authority may direct his separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 27 June 2002, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for a conditional waiver of an administrative separation board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than 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 and the issue submitted with the application, 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 the applicant's service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the 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 analyst noted the applicant's issue and found that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  The analyst further found no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.  Additionally, if the applicant desires to reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his 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.  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: 14 January 2009         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 characterization of service was too harsh and as a result, it is inequitable.  The Board found that the length and quality of the applicant's service mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.   
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 4    No change 1
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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080004729
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages