Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/10/08	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 149 and attached document submitted by the applicant in lieu of DD Form 293.

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: 060609
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060802   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: D Co, 210th BSB, Fort Drum, NY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060627, SCM, through neglect miss movement (060116), and disrespectful in deportment towards a LTC (060310).  Reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $849, and confinement for 30 days.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  20
Current ENL Date: 050406    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  23 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 03Mos, 27Days ?????
Total Service:  		01 Yrs, 03Mos, 27Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 63B10 Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic   GT: 81   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  El Paso, TX
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 9 June 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense for disrespectful in deportment towards a LTC, and failed to report to Recovery (H8) School at Fort Jackson, SC (060116), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action,  conditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board contingent upon the acceptance of his offer to plead guilty at a Summary Court-Martial, and submitted a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate and senior  intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 26 July 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.
       
       The analyst noted that on the applicant's DD Form 214 block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code reads "4," however, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 12c, AR 635-200, commission of a serious offense, which according to AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD)/Reentry (RE) Codes Cross-Reference Table, requires an reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3." 
       
       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, 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 all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and document he submitted, 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 misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his 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, if the applicant desires to reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his eligibility to reenlist.  Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes.  Further, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       Additionally, the analyst found that someone in the separation process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code of  "4."  The analyst recommends that block 27 be administratively changed to "3" as approved by the separation approving authority.  Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's reentry eligibility (RE) code, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable.  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 31 July 2009         Location: Washingtion, 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 inequitable.  The Board determined that the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e., minor nature of the offenses), mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  
Also, the Board directs that the ARBA Support Division-St Louis to administratively change block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code to "3." 
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 3    No change 2
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: The Board directs that the ARBA Support Division-St Louis to administratively change block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code to "3." 										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080017677
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages