Applicant Name:  

Application Receipt Date: 080611	

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: NIF
Discharge Received:     Date: 060831   
Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: A Co, 1-21 Inf, Schofield Bks, Hi 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050124, FTR (041104), leaving post without being properly relieved (041229), failure to inventory sensitive items (051013), punishment, NIF (CG)

060427, FTR (060328, reduction to E-3 (susp), $451 X 1 (susp), 14 extra duty and restriction (CG)

060623, FTR X 4 (060606, 060607, 060609 and 060617) reduction to E-2, $394 X 1, 14 days extra duty and restriction (CG)

060717, disrespectful language toward a NCO, reduction to E-1, $636 X2, 45 days extra duty and restriction (FG) 

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NA

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Year/Month:  7601  
HOR City, State: Rayne, LA
Current ENL Date: 040811    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 00Mos, 21Days ?????
Total Service:  06 Yrs, 04Mos, 00Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 000501-040810/HD
Highest Grade: E-5
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10 Infantryman   GT: 97   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Iraq    Combat: Iraq (there is none listed on the DD 214; however, the applicant received a ARCOM for service in Iraq (030228-031105)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 29 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 misconduct—pattern of misconduct for wrongfully sleeping while posted as a sentinel (050206),  failing to report x 6 (060328, 060329, 060606, 060607, 060609, and 06 0617),  and for failing to obey orders (060606), with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 15 August 2006 the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon his receiving a characterization of service of no less favorable than honorable.  The applicant submitted a statement on 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 with a general under honorable conditions discharge.   On 20 August 2006, the separation authority approved the separation action and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
      
      The file contains a CID report dated 27 February 2006.

      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, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's diagnosis of PTSD by the Department of Veterans Affairs supported by the documents with his application.  However, in the view of the applicant's entire service record, the analyst found that his diagnosis did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  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: 080723              
Location: Washington DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




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 0    No change 5   - 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 and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  

								        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: NA
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: 080725
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080009278
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages