Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/03/30	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 149 and attached document submitted by the applicant in lieu of DD Form 293. 

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: 080506
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080715   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHT, Regt Spt Sqdn, Fort Irwin, CA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080212, failure to report and breaking restriction; reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $670 pay x 2 months, (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).  However, this document is not part of the available record, see recommendation memorandum.

071128, disobeying a lawful command from a commissioned officer and improperm use of a Government computer; reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $380 (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG).  However, this document is not part of the available record, see recommendation memorandum.

071201, the suspension of punishment of forfeiture $180 was vacated for new offense of breaking restriction.  However, this document is not part of the available record, see recommendation memorandum.

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  20
Current ENL Date: 050801    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 11Mos, 15Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 01Mos, 06Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USAR-050610-050731/NA
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 56M10 Chaplin Assistant   GT: 115   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Gladwin, MI 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed





 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 6 May 2008, 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 disobeying a commissioned officer (071013), breaking restriction (071208), failure to repair for physical training (071210), failure to obey a noncommissioned officer (072111), failure to report x 2 (080310), (080314), and failure to obey an Army Regulation (080314), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant's election of rights is not contained in the available record and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  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 2 June  2008, 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 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, the issue and document 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 U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges.  Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge.  Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.   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: 15 January 2010         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 AR20090005443
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages