Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/07/02	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he needs to have his discharge upgraded so that he may be able to use his Montgomery GI Bill benefits. He has completed his 1st 4 year enlistment and paid the $1200.00. He was on his second enlistment. The type of discharge is the only reason he cannot use the benefits.  

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: 020531
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 020802   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: Battery A, 1st Battalion, (Airborne), 321st Field Artillery Regiment, Fort Bragg, NC 28310 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 000425, Willfully disobeyed a lawful order from a 1SG (000411); restriction and extra duty for 7 days; to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (000525); (Summarized)

000821, Willfully disobeyed a lawful order from a SFC (000725); reduction to Private (E-2), suspended to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (001020); forfeiture of $263.00 pay per month for one month; suspended to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (001020); and extra duty for 14 days (CG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  22
Current ENL Date: Reenl/Date-NIF    Current ENL Term: NIF Years  The applicant's Reenlistment contract (DD Form 4/1 is not part of the available record; however, his ERB (Enlisted Record Brief) shows his ETS date as: (20041107)
Current ENL Service: 	NIF Yrs, NIFMos, ??Days The extension of service for the period under review was at the request and for the convenience of the Government. See DD Form 214 item 18; Remarks.
Total Service:  		4 Yrs, 0 Mos, 25 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 980708-000000/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B1P Cannon Crewmember   GT: 109   EDU: HS Ltr   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, ASR, PB

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 14 May 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 you disobeyed a noncommissioned officer on multiple occasions and for indecents acts with a child, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 4 January 2002, 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 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; however, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.  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: 8 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 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 AR20080010922
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages