Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 0811029	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 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: Undated
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 990430   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 782d Main Spt Bn, Div Spt Cmd, Ft. Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 990322, Failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 2 (990223 & 990224); Reduction to E3, forfeiture of $275.00 pay per month for one month, extra duty for 14 days (CG).

981214, Summarized Article 15, Failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (981202); Extra duty and restriction for 14 days, suspended.

970311, Summarized Article 15, Failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (970303); Extra duty for 14 days. 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  25
Current ENL Date: 960513    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 11 Mos, 18 Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 11 Mos, 18 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 62B  Const Equip Rep   GT: 94   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR, PB

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Kissimmee, FL
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states, in anticipation of serving in law enforcement, he "passed the Florida Highway Patrol CJBAT exam with a 90% score as well as the Physical abilities exam."

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 26 May 1999, 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—for having received a Company Grade Article 15 for failure to go to his appointed place of duty (990322), a Summarized Article 15 for failure to go to his appointed place of duty (981202) and, a Summarized Article 15 for failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 990311, with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  The Applicant was advised of his rights, consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  Subsequently, the separation authority 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 a General Officer Letter of Reprimand, dated 23 January 1997, reprimanding the Applicant for drunk driving on 5 January 1997.

       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 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.  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.  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. 
       The analyst notes that block 27 (Reentry Code) of the Applicant's DD Form 214 erroneously indicates RE 1, whereas the appropriate RE code is '3' in accordance with Separation Program Designator (SPD/Reentry(RE) Codes Cross-Reference Table, dated 15 June 2006.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 17 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.  

            The Board noted the administrative error as to the Applicant's current DD Form 214, block 27 and directed an administrative correction be made to block 27 to read 'RE3'.

        
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: No Change
Other: Change RE Code to RE3.										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080017102
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages