Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/12/04	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA; Ad Hoc Proceeding, Probationary Officer Elimination, 17 October 2007.     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting documentation 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: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 071115   Chapter: 4       AR: 600-8-24
Reason: Unacceptable Conduct	   RE:     SPD: JNC   Unit/Location: HHD, 94th MP Battalion,  Yongsan, Korea, APO AP 96205 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070510, Knowingly fraternized with junior enlisted Soldiers on terms of military equality, to wit: driving them to the King Club in the Itaewon Entertainment District and consuming alcohol with them in the club (070316); Wrongfully endeavored to impede an investigation in the case against the Applicant by asking a junior enlisted Soldier to make a false official statement to the investigating officer (070319); Forfeiture of $1442.00 pay per month for 2 months and a written reprimand (General Officer).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  23
Current ENL Date: 040503    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 06 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 06 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: 01		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31A  Military Police   GT: NIF   EDU: College Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR; AAM (060626-070131) not listed on the Applicant's DD Form 214

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Eddyville, KY
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the Applicant. 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 25 July 2007, the Applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2, AR 600-8-24, by reason of misconduct, moral or professional dereliction.  The Applicant was directed to show cause for his retention in the Army after having received a General Officer Article 15 for fraternizing with junior enlisted Soldiers, and wrongfully endeavoring to impede an investigation.  The Applicant was advised that he could submit a voluntary resignation in lieu of elimination or submit a rebuttal.  The Applicant submitted a rebuttal.  Subsequently, his case was forwarded to Human Resources Command for submission to the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs).   The Ad Hoc Review Board recommended that the Applicant’s elimination be accepted with issuance of a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 17 October 2007, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board 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 10 May 200, reprimanding the Applicant for "fraternizing with enlisted Soldiers and attempting to impede an official investigation."  The reprimand was imposed as punishment under Article 15, UCMJ.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 600-8-24 sets forth the basic authority for Officer Transfers and Discharges.  Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the Applicant’s military records, the issues, and the supporting documents and evidence he submitted, the analyst determined that the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  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 Army Officers.  By his misconduct, the Applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The Applicant provided no convincing, 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 but 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.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable.   

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 2 November 2009         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: Yes

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: Yes

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the Applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, 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: No Change
Other: No Change										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090000469
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages