Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/11/12	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached 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: 080219
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080321   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: A Btry, 3/7th FA, Schofield Barracks, HI 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 071025, Disobeying a lawful order from a senior noncommissioned (070905); and violating a lawful general order (070905) by wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverage within the MNC-I AOR, reduction to E4, forfeiture of $1031.00 per month for two months, 45 days extra duty, and 45 days restriction (suspended), (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  27
Current ENL Date: 070824    Current ENL Term: 06 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 06Mos, 28Days ?????
Total Service:  		09 Yrs, 08Mos, 00Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-980723-010722/HD
                                       ARNG-010723-011128/HD
                                       RA-011129-041113/HD
                                       RA-041114-070823/HD
Highest Grade: E5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B10/Cannon Crewmember   GT: 93   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii, Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (040110-050215)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM-5, AGCM-2, GWOTSM, ICM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR-2, CAB

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 19 February 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct for wrongfully disobeying an order from a superior commissioned officer (070119) by bringing a cell phone on a convoy mission; wrongfully disobeying an order from a superior noncommissioned officer (070121), by using an up Armor HUMVV for personal use; wrongfully disobeying a senior noncommissioned officer by not going to "At Ease" (070905); and wrongfully violating a General Order (070905), by consuming an alcoholic beverage within the MNC-1 AOR, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, 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 commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 28 February 2008, 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, 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 document, and the issues 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, the analyst noted the applicant's issues, however, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Further, the analyst acknowledges the independent documents submitted with the application and that the applicant was diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which was determined to be service connected and was granted a 50% disability rating and 10% rating for  traumatic brain injury (TBI).  However, the evidence of record shows that the applicant was treated by competent medical authority and was psychiatrically cleared for any action deemed appropriated by the Command and that the discharge was not the result of any medical condition.  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: 23 July 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 AR20080018594
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages