Applicant Name:  ?????

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

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant.  The applicnat states " The reason why my discharge should be changed is because I asked to be released, which did not warrant me receiving the discharge given to me at that time.  I completed my first obligation, and was halfway through my second contract.  Also, I want to utilize the Montgomery GI Bill; in which I invested in".

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: 001201
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 001219   Chapter: 14       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHB, 2d Bn, 5th Field Artillery, Ft. Sill, OK 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 000718 with intent to deceive on 28 June 2000 made a false official statement to an NCO; with intent to deceive on 28 June 2000 made a false official statement to a CPT; without authority, on 28 June 2000 failed to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty;  without authority, on 24 April 2000 failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty; without authority, on 26 April 2000 failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty; reduced to E-2, forfeiture of $563 of pay for per month for two months (suspended); restriction and extra duty for 45 days (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  20
Current ENL Date: 981029    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 1Mos, 20Days ?????
Total Service:  		4 Yrs, 5Mos, 18Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 960702-990701/HD
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13C Tacfire Op Sp   GT: 97   EDU: HS Letter   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARGCM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Smithfield, VA
Post Service Accomplishments: Nothing provided by the Applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 1 December 2000, 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—for making false official statements to the chain of command, failing to go or being late to several formations and receiving numerous letters of indebtedness from creditors 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 7 December 2000, 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 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. Further, the analyst noted the applicant’s issue however, 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. 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. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 090930         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 AR20080019835
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages