Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/01	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: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 990415   Chapter: 2-37       AR: 600-8-24
Reason: Failure to Complete Course of Instruction	   RE:     SPD: JHF   Unit/Location: B Co, 1/145th Avn, Fort Rucker, AL 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 990313, Intentionally invade the privacy of a female officer (990207), forfeiture of $500.00 per month for one month and a written reprimand, (GO).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  27
Current ENL Date: 980605    Current ENL Term: 06 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 10Mos, 11Days ?????
Total Service:  		04 Yrs, 11Mos, 13Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-940503-980604/HD
Highest Grade: WO1		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 003A0/Student   GT: NA   EDU: AA Degree   Overseas: Hawaii, Haiti (Prior Period of Service)   Combat: Haiti (950115-950404)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, AFEM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Clermont, FL
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant provided a copy of his transcript from Ashford University which shows he has a 4.0 grade point average.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicant's discharge from the Army are not contained in the available records.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature.  His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 2, Paragraph 2-37, AR 600-8-24, by reason of failure to complete course of instruction, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JHF (i.e., failure to complete course of instruction).
       
       The applicant's record contains a General Officers Official Reprimand for criminal surveillance.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 600-8-24 sets the basic authority for Officer Transfers and Discharges.  Chapter 2, Paragraph 2-37a (1),(2), outlines the policy, procedure, and rules for processing involuntary REFRAD and termination of Reserve appointments of student officers and warrant officers attending branch orientation, familiarization courses, or Warrant Officer Basic Courses (WOBC).  An RC officer with less than 3 years commissioned service will be released from AD and discharged from his or her USAR commissioned when the officer fails to meet the standards of service schools due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, academic or leadership deficiencies, or resigning from a course.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s available military records during the term of service under review and the issues he submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 2, Paragraph 2-37, AR 600-8-24, by reason of failure to complete course of instruction, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant wree fully protected throughout the separation process.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issues; however, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.  Further, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined with the application and in the documents with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  Additionally, the analyst determined that the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) does not contain all the specific documents that would indicate the reason for the separation action from the United States Army.  If the applicant desires to appear before a personal appearance Board, the burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration.  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: 20 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 term of service 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 AR20090007682
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages