Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/06/06	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 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: 050718
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 051027   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: Regimental HQ & HQ Troop, 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, Camp Sykes, Iraq, APO AE 09379 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050224, Failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 4, (050118); (050121); (050123); (050125); reduction to Private (E-1); forfeiture of $617.00 pay per month for two months, and extra duty for 45 days (FG) 

Article 15; 040826, Failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 4, (040608); (040608); (040723); (040818); extra duty and restriction for 14 days (Summarized)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 030623    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  with a moral waiver approved on (030620)
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 4 Mos, 5 Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 4 Mos, 5 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92G10 Food Service Operations   GT: 110   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Kuwait/Iraq (031226-040331) & (050228-050927); 
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWTEM, GWTSM, ICMDL, ASR

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

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 18 July 2005, 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 numerous counseling statements for his misconduct of repeatedly failing to be at his appointed place of duty; disobedience and disrespectfulness towards a noncommissioned officer, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 30 July 2005, 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 submitted 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 16 August 2005, the applicant agin consulted with legal counsel and unconditionally waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board.  The separation authority approved the unconditional waiver submitted by the applicant, waived further rehabilitative efforts 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 the entire applicant’s military records, 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 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, even though a single incident, the analyst concluded that the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  Having examined all the circumstances, the analyst determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brings discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  Further, the analyst noted the applicant's issue desiring to resume his military career; however, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  An RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  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: 11 March 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 a careful review of the entire applicant’s military records, and the issue submitted with the application, the Board found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  The Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board found that the length of the applicant's service, to include the applicant's combat service (i.e., two deployments to Kuwait and Iraq) mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  

Additionally, the Board found that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214 block 27, the wrong reentry eligibility (RE) code.  In view of the error, the Board voted to directed that an administrative change be made to block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code to "3" in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210.  Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's reentry eligibility (RE) code, 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: The Board voted 5/0 to administratively change the reentry eligibility (RE) code to "3."										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080009242
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 3 pages