Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/04/14	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 149 and supporting 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: 031002
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 031106   Chapter: 14-12b(2)    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: A Co, 1-27 IN Bn, Schofield Bks, HI 

Time Lost: 8 days total, AWOL x 3 (030318-030318, 030806-030811, 030820-030820).

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

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 030102    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 09Mos, 27Days ?????
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 09Mos, 27Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10/Infantryman   GT: 100   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

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

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 2 October 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b(2), AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconduct—for being disrespectful to a commissioned officer and to a senior NCO (030823), for leaving his guard post during a live fire exercise and causing a cease fire until he was located (030820), and for being AWOL (030806-030812), with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 2 October 2002, the applicant declined legal counsel, however, a subsequent undated document indicates that he consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The record indicates that he acknowledged receipt of the notification memorandum with intent to chapter for a pattern of misconduct.  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 an honorable discharge.  On 14 October 2003, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be separated from the Army with an honorable discharge.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  It states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor, and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service is so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.  Chapter 14 of this regulation 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 during the period of enlistment under review and the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit a change to the narrative reason for discharge on the applicant's DD Form 214.  The applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of the former soldier’s service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  The record shows that on 6 August 2003, the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder and that he met the criteria for separation under the provisions of Paragraph 5-17, AR 635-200.  However, due to the extensive nature of his misconduct, the unit commander decided to initiate the separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12b(2) for a pattern of misconduct.  AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17d, stipulates that a soldier, although diagnosed under paragraph 5-17 for an adjustment disorder, may be separated under any other provision of this regulation.  Furthermore,  the analyst noted the applicant's issue, however, the narrative reason for separation is governed by specific directives.  The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12b(2), AR 635-200.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct", and the separation code is "JKA."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  Additionally, the analyst noted other issues submitted with the application as to his date of birth, enlistment date, and social security number entered incorrectly in some documents, however, the correction that the applicant requests to be made does not fall within the purview of this Board.  The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), utilizing DD Form 149 regarding this matter.  An application for that Board is enclosed.  Finally, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 6 February 2009         Location: Washington, D.C.

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

Case Number AR20080006845
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages