Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/07/01	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant 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?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 000203
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 000310   Chapter: 14       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: Hospital Co, USAMEDDAC, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 991115, violation of Article 134, reduction to E-2, 30 days extra duty, the record does not indicate whether Company or Field Grade.  However, that document is not part of the available record.

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 960816    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 06Mos, 25Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 06Mos, 25Days Includes 2.50 days of excess leave (000201-000203)
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 91B10 Medical Care Spec   GT: 98   EDU: 12 Years   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, AGCM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Winder, GA
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard State of Georgia on (000420) for 04 Yrs, 05 Mos, 06 Days.  Subsequently, the applicant was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, received numerous awards and decorations to include the Purple Heart.  Further, he received three previous honorable discharges and attained the rank of SSG/E-6 and currently serving with an Expiration Term of Service (ETS (20110625). 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       Evidence of record shows that on 3 February 2000, 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  receiving counseling statements for failure to repair x 2 (991129), (991104), received an Article 15 for being drunk on duty (991115), failed to report for a mandatory urinalysis drug test (990825), failed to report for alcohol/drug counseling appointment (990820), failure to pay just debts x 2 (9908050, (990709), counseled for a number of different things (990714), and counseled for not wearing his seat belt (990129), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant's election of rights is not contained in the available record and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  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 28 February 2000, 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, 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, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to fully honorable.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  While, the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, and his post service accomplishments (i.e., the applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard State of Georgia for 04 Yrs, 05 Mos, 06 Days, the applicant was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, received numerous awards and decorations to include the Purple Heart, also received three previous honorable discharges, attained the rank of SSG/E-6 and is currently serving with an Expiration Term of Service Date of 20110625), mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that relief be granted in the form of an upgrade of the  characterization of service to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.   

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 24 April 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 is too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  The Board determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, and his post service accomplishments (i.e., the applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard State of Georgia for 04 Yrs, 05 Mos, 06 Days, the applicant was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, received numerous awards and decorations to include the Purple Heart, also received three previous honorable discharges, attained the rank of SSG/E-6 and is currently serving with an Expiration Term of Service Date of 20110625), mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  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 5    No change 0
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: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080010897
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages