Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "I made a grave many mistakes while I was in the army.  All I can really say is that I was young and stupid at the time.  I know this isn't the greatest excuse and truthfully there is no excuse but I can honestly say that I have changed.  I have matured tremendously since then.  I now have 3 beautiful children which has forced me to change my life for the best, not only for myself but primarily for them.  One of the things hanging over my head has been this discharge.  I would greatly appreciate it if at all possible to have the discharge upgraded. With that and my finishing of college, I will be able to correct all my previous mistakes in life which I am proud to say I have learned from.  Thanking you in advance,"

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: 011212
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 020129   Chapter: 14-12a       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKN   Unit/Location: HHB, 3rd Armored Corps Artillery, Fort Sill, OK 

Time Lost: AWOL for 4 days (000429-000502), mode of return unknown.  However, this AWOL period is not annotated on the DD Form 214 block 29, dates of time lost during this period.  

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 011012, willfully disobey a lawful order from a COL, by wrongfully using a Government travel card ((010615-010830); reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $200 pay x 2 months (suspended), extra duty for 45 days (FG).

011107, the suspension of punishment of forfeiture of $200 pay x 2 months was vacated for new offense of wrongfully operating his POV on Fort Sill without proper registration (011015). 

000728, with intent to defraud, forgery of  a check x 2 in the sum of $11.00 (000525), and $8.10 (000518); reduction to E-1 (suspended), forfeiture of $100 pay x 2 months (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).

000517, dereliction of duty (000510), and AWOL (000429-000502); extra duty and restriction for 14 days (Summarized).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 010405    Current ENL Term: 2 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 09Mos, 25Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 04Mos, 29Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-990901-010404/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 71l10 Administrative Spec   GT: 120   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR



V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Ocala, FL
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 12 December 2001, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-pattern of misconduct for failures to obey lawful orders, failure to report, and false official statements, 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 commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 14 January 2002, 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 a Military Police Report dated 15 June 2000, with additional offenses, subjects,  victims and persons related to the report.

       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 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 issue and determined 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.  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: 6 November 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: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090002276
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages