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 supporting 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: 060403
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060509   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHD, BCTP, Fort Leavenworth, KS 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060310, with intent to deceive provided a false statement (060130), reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $1,009 x 2, 45 days of extra duty and restriction (suspended), (FG)

050929, violations of the UCMJ, Article 86 (AWOL) and Article 92 (failure to obey a lawful order or regulation), reduction to E-1 (suspended), 14 days extra duty and restriction, as stated in the company commander's memorandum dated 17 April 2006 which is  contained in the available record (CG)

050510, drunk on duty (050219), forfeiture of $480, 14 days extra duty and restriction (CG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  20
Current ENL Date: 011024    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 06Mos, 15Days ?????
Total Service:  		06 Yrs, 05Mos, 29Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 001005-021023/HD
                                       IADT 990928-000311/UNC
                                       ARNG 990525-001004/HD
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 42A/HR Spc   GT: 110   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (040209-050219)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, JMUA, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, GWOTEM, NCOPDR, 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 3 April 2006, 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 continued pattern of misconduct, which had a detrimental effect on the good order and discipline of the unit, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 11 April 2006, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board, 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 approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 28 April 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.
       
       The record contains a GOMOR dated 9 December 2005, a CID Report dated 3 February 2006, and an MP Report dated 17 October 2005.

       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, the issues, and the documents submitted with his 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 repeated 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 analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the diagnosis of PTSD outlined in the documents with his application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted, the applicant fully understood the difference between right and wrong when he committed the misconduct that caused the unit commander to initiate the separation action.  Additionally, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  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: ?????         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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090006135
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 3 pages