Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 081020	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 and supporting documentation 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: 080115
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080125   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHC, 1/507th PIR, Ft. Benning, GA 

Time Lost: None  ((Applicant's DD 214 indicates no time lost; however, the unit commander's recommendation for discharge indicates the Applicant was AWOL for 1 day 070814-070815), mode of return/circumstances not in the file.)) 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070924, AWOL 1 day (070814-070815); forfeiture of $587.00 pay and 14 days extra duty, suspended (CG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  27
Current ENL Date: 070706    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 06 Mos, 19 Days ?????
Total Service:  		08 Yrs, 00 Mos, 21 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA  030820-070705/HD
                                       RA 000105-030819/HD
Highest Grade: E6		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B  Infantryman   GT: 117   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany, SWA   Combat: Iraq (060101-070201)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM (2), AAM (2), AGCM (2), NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR, CIB, EIB, PB, AAB

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Columbus, GA
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant provided documentation indicating he has been accepted into college with the intent of earning a Bachelor's degree.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 15 January 2008, the unit commander notified the Applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct having been AWOL and demonstrating discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline, with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  The Applicant was advised of his rights.  On 15 January 2008, 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 commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  On 17 January 2008, the separation authority approved the conditional waiver request, waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the Applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
       
       Record of evidence contains an arrest report from the Columbus Police Department, dated 071102. 

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  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 Applicant’s military records, and the issue and documents 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 former Soldier’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 determined that the Applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which Applicant states led to the separation action under review.  Additionally, the record does not support the issue that the Applicant suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the Applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Lastly, the analyst noted the Applicant's issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. In light 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: 5 August 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 2    No change 3
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: No Change										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080016418
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages