Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/06	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 149 and attached 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: 081112
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 090109   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHC, 5th BCT, Fort Bliss, Texas 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080701, failure to go to appointed place of duty x 2 (080229 and 080624), forfeiture of $599 for one month suspended, 14 days of extra duty and restriction (CG). 

080722, failure to go to appointed place of duty x 3 (080702, 080707, and 080714) reduction to E4, forfeiture of $1,067.00 x 2 (suspended), 45 days restriction, 30 days extra duty (FG) 

060605, failure to file a DA 31(060303) reduction to E4(suspended), forfeiture of $1,136.00 for one month, (FG) 

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): ?????

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  28
Current ENL Date: 050926    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 03Mos, 14Days ?????
Total Service:  		09 Yrs, 04Mos, 09Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 990901-031209/HD 
                                       RA 031210-050925/HD 

Highest Grade: E5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 15W20/ Unman Aerial Vehicle Operator   GT: 116   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM-4, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2

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 12 November 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 pattern of misconduct for missing formation on numerous occasions, disobeying lawful orders, violating security procedures, disrespect to officers,and being drunk and disorderly, 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, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an Administrative Separation Board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army 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 22 December 2008, the separation authority approved the conditional waiver request, considered the applicant's pending Medical Evaluation Board, 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 evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.

Futher, the separation authority did not find that the Soldier's medical condition was the direct or substantial contributing cause of the conduct that led to the recommendation for administrative elimination. 

Assitionally, the analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the Army Discharge Review Board is not empowered to restore the former service member to active duty, or to restore his rank or grade.  The Board may only change the characterization or reason for discharge.  If an applicant believes there is an error or injustice in his discharge, he then may make an application to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records, utilizing a DD Form 149, which can be obtained on line or from veteran’s assistance offices.  

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: 17 March 2010         Location: Washington, D.C.

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 AR20090006033
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages