Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/12/23	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The Applicant provided no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the board. See enclosed DD Form 293 and 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: 060522
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060608   Chapter: 14-12B       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHC, 1st Space Bde, US Army Space and Missile Defense Command, Peterson Air Force Base, CO 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060417 with intent to deceive he made a false official statement to a CPL, willfully disobeyed a lawful order from his 1SG, unlawfully strike a SPC, was drunk and disorderly, with intent to deceive he made a false official statement to his 1SG; reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $846 of pay for two months, restriction for 21 days and extra duty for 14 days (FG).

060404 Summarized Article 15 without proper authority, willfully damaged the wall by slamming the door in the barracks, willfully destroy a sink, drunk and disorderly: restriction and extra duty for 14 days (suspended) (CG).


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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 030122    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 4Mos, 17Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 4Mos, 17Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 14J10 Air Defense Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence Tactical
Operations Center Enhanced Operator/Maintainer    GT: 107   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Fountain, CO
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states he is married, working full time and attending community college work toward an Associates of Art Degree.




VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 22 May 2006, 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 willful damage to government property, drunk and disorderly, false statements, two specifications,  and assault, with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant waived his right to consult with legal counsel and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board. The applicant did not submit a statement on his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  On 26 May 2006, 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 all the applicant’s military records, and the issue and documents 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. Furthermore, the analyst noted that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact the local recruiter to determine 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.  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: 091009         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 AR20090001588
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages