Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/11/14	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 and attached documents (3) 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: 080415
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080509   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: D Company, 40th Engineer Battalion, US Army Garrison Baumholder, US Army NATO Brigade, APO AE 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070924, Operated a passenger car while drunk on or about 070705; forfeiture of $650.00 pay per month for two months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG)

Article 15; 070611, Broke restriction on or about 070421; forfeiture of $303.00 pay, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated on or before 070911; extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG)

Article 15; 070314, Operated a passenger car while drunk on or about 070211; wrongfully left the scene of an accident, without making his identity known on or about 070211; reduction to PVT; forfeiture of $601.00 pay per month for two months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG)

070330; General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand-for driving while under the influence of alcohol and leaving the scene of an accident; (Administrative)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 040804    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  20 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 9 Mos, 6 Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 9 Mos, 6 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 21B10 Combat Engineer   GT: 115   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany, Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (051117-061117)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, GWTEM, GWTSM, ICMDL, ASR, OSR, C/Ach

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 14 April 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense; in that he operated a passenger car while drunk and fled the scene of an accident on 070211; operated a passenger car while drunk on 070705; and broke restriction on 070421, 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, 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 commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 29 April 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. 
       
       The applicant's record contains three Military Police Reports dated 28 August 2007; 13 February 2007 and 11 February 2007.

       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, but a general discharge 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, supporting  documents and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses.  The applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of the applicant'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 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 issue; however, even though the applicant claims that his offenses were isolated events, the analyst concluded that the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct, expected of Soldiers in the Army.  Having examined all the circumstances, the analyst determined that the applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant’s service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.  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: 11 September 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 AR20080018628
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages