Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/03/19	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states: "My name is quentin horn and my request for an upgrade is so I can attend the police academy. The police academy picks cadets by a point system and in order for me to get a better point system I need my discharge upgraded. What I did was wrong and I learned from my mistake and I am asking for forgiveness".

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: 060208
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060306   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 183rd Maint Co, 3rd ACR (Rear)(Provisional), Fort Carson, CO 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051229, in Iraq, on or about 8 November 2005, the applicant was disrespectful in language toward a noncommissioned officer who was then in the execution of his office, by saying to him, "What else was I supposed to do?", or words to that effect; reduction to Private (E-1); forfeiture of $617.00 pay per month for two months; extra duty for 45 days, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 27 June 2006; and restriction for 45 days, suspended (continuation sheet NIF). (FG)

051106,  in Iraq, between on or about 18 October 2005 and 8 November 2005, the applicant was disrepectful and disobeyed orders from noncommissioned officers on seven separate occasions; on or about 18 October 2005, the applicant wrongfully communicated a threat to a noncommissioned officer by saying, "I am going to wreck your ass if you try to write me up", or words to that effect; at or near LSA Anaconda, Iraq, on or about 19 October 2005, the applicant assaulted a noncommissioned officer by punching him on the right side of his head; reduction to Private (E-2); forfeiture of $617.00 pay per month for two months, suspended,  to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 5 January 2006; extra duty for 45 days, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 27 June 2006. (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  28
Current ENL Date: 050604    Current ENL Term: NIF Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 09Mos, 02Days ?????
Total Service:  		04 Yrs, 00Mos, 29Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 020206-050603/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 62B10/Construction Equipment Repairer   GT: 77   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Iraq, Kuwait   Combat: Iraq/Kuwait  (030115-040115), (041216-051127)
Decorations/Awards: AAM (3), AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, ICM



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 2 February 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—for disrespecting noncomissioned officers on four occasions between 22 May 2005 and 14 December 2005; failure to follow an order or regulation between 4 May 2005 and 14 December 2005; lying to a noncommissioned officer on 4 May 2005; FTR and leaving his place of duty on 13 December 2005, 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 submitted 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 16 February 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 the entire 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.  Futhermore, analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  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: 25 June 2009         Location: Chicago, IL

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: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090004001
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 3 pages