Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/02/05	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 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: 070405
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070504   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHB, 69th ADA Bde, APO AE 09036 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  25
Current ENL Date: 050911    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 07Mos, 24Days ?????
Total Service:  		08 Yrs, 09Mos, 00Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-980805-020407/HD
                                       RA-020408-050910/HD
Highest Grade: E-6		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 14J30 AD C4I TOC Enhancement Operations/Maintainer   GT: 117   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea/Germany/Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (030223-040222) and Afghanistan (050409-060315)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM-3, AGCM-2, ACM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-4, MUC

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Chaska, MN
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 5 April 2007, 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 failure to obey a lawful order from a superior commissioned officer on two separate occasions, 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 service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended disapproval of the separation action and the applicant be retained on active duty in the U.S. Army; however, if discharged recommend that his service be characterized as general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 23 April 2007, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions discharge.

       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 issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to fully honorable.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  While the applicant’s misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, to include his combat service (i.e., two combat tours), mitigated the discrediting entry in the service record.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that relief be granted in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. 

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 characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, to include his combat service (i.e., two combat tours), mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 











 
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 3    No change 2
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 AR20090006086
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages