Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/03/02	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 149 in lieu of DD Form 293 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: 050316
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 050331   Chapter: 14-12c(2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: B Co, 9th BN, Ft Campbell, KY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050120, derelict in the performance of his duties on or between (041202-050118), treating an NCO with contempt on or between (041202-041220); reduction to E3, forfeiture of $361, extra duty and restriction for 14 days and an oral reprimand (CG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  24
Current ENL Date: 020320    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 00Mos, 11Days (misdemeanor waiver)
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 00Mos, 11Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92F/Petroleum Supply Spec   GT: 113   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Kuwait/Iraq (030201-040217
Decorations/Awards: GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NDSM, ASR, OSR x2

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Decatur, IL
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 on16 March 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 12c, AR 635-200, commission of a serious offense because he received a company grade Article 15 on (050120) for dereliction of duty and treating an NCO with contempt and testing positive for marijuana on (050114), 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 did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  On 23 March 2005, 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.  The analyst noted the applicant's issue however, the correction that the applicant requests to be made to his 201 file, does not fall within the purview of this Board.  The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), utilizing DD Form 149 regarding this matter.  An application for that Board is enclosed.  Furthermore, the analyst 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.  
       Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the analyst determined that the applicant was incorrectly assigned a separation code of "JKK" and reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4”.  The applicant was notified throughout the separation process for that he was being discharge for commission of a serious offense, Chapter 14-12c. Therefore, the analyst recommends that the codes be administratively change to separation code "JKQ" and reentry eligibility code to "RE-3".  Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's reentry eligibility (RE) code, the analyst found 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: 24 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: Change SPD Code to "JKQ"										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090004718
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages