Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/08/14	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See 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: 070824
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080716   Chapter: 14-12c    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: 547th Medical Co, Fort Lewis, WA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 061212, theft of 40 percocet prescription tablets, value under $500 (060728), reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $1,009.00 (suspended), 45 days restriction and extra duty (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  23
Current ENL Date: 040805    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 10Mos, 23Days ?????
Total Service:  		13 Yrs, 00Mos, 12Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USAR 950705-951121/UNC
                                       RA 961125-020724/HD
                                       RA 020725-040804/HD
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 68W/Health Care Spc   GT: 108   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea, Iraq   Combat: Iraq x 2 (041208-051207 and 060526-070526)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM-3, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR-3

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Aberdeen, WA
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 24 August 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of  a serious  offense, for having been charged by civilian authorities of attempted robbery (070107) in the first degree while armed with a deadly weapon and with assault in the second degree, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 21 March 2007, 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 general, under honorable conditions.  The applicant did not submit a statement on his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended disapproval of the conditional waiver, and that the applicant be discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 25 April 2008, the separation authority disapproved the conditional waiver request and directed an administrative separation board.   On 24 June 2008, the administrative separation board convened.  The applicant’s counsel appeared before the board on his behalf.  The board recommended that the applicant be discharged with issuance of a character of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The separation authority approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.  The record indicates the applicant was convicted by a civil court and sentenced to 84 months in confinement.
       
       The record contains an MP Report dated 7 September 2006, and a Civilian Police Report and Court documents dated 24 January 2007.

       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 the entire applicant’s military records, and the issue and numerous documents submitted with his 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 his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By his serious misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a general or 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.  The applicant states that his untreated Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was a contributing factor in his discharge, however , the record does not support the issue that the applicant suffers from  PTSD and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  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: 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 1    No change 4
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 AR20080012739
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages