Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/07	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: 081017
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 081114   Chapter: 14-12a       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Minor Infractions)	   RE:     SPD: JKN   Unit/Location: 410th MP Co, Fort Hood, TX 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070422, derelict in the performance of his duties on the guard tower (070408), without proper authority, willfully damaged the glass of a turret shield, of a value of $2505, military property of the United States (070408); reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $340, extra duty for 14 days and restriction for 14 days (CG). 

060517, through negligence, discharge a M-4 carbine rifle in the sleeping quarters of the 410th Military Police Company (060423); extra duty for 10 days, restriction for 14 days (suspended) and an oral reprimand (Summarized).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 040812    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	04 Yrs, 03Mos, 03Days ?????
Total Service:  		04 Yrs, 03Mos, 03Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31B10 Military Police   GT: 108   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (060622-070621)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, ICM-W/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, CAB 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Bradford, PA
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 17 October 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12a, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-minor discliplinary actions for negligence by discharging a M-4 carbine rifle in the sleeping quarters of the company,  negligence in the performance of guard tower duty located at Camp Liberty, Iraq, willful damage to Government property, consistently fails to obey orders, fails to pay debts, fails to report for duties, dereliction of duties, insubordinate to NCOs, willfully disobeyed a superior officer and received numerous negative counselings, 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 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 31 October 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, but a general discharge 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 partial relief in the form of 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 length and quality of the applicant’s service, to include his combat service and the medical circumstances which impaired his ability to serve, mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that partial relief be granted in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable conditions.  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: 21 July 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  







 
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 2    No change 3
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 AR20090007795
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages