Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/17	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 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: 050209
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 050812   Chapter: 4-2b and 4-24a(1)    AR: 600-8-24
Reason: Unacceptable Conduct	   RE:     SPD: BNC   Unit/Location: HHD, 83d Chemical BN, Ft Polk, LA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040914, fraternize with an enlisted person and engage in sexual activity with an enlisted person (030601-040418); written reprimand and forfeiture of not more than $2110.05 for two months (GO).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  29
Current ENL Date: 000518    Current ENL Term: Indef Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	5 Yrs, 02Mos, 25Days ?????
Total Service:  		7 Yrs, 10Mos, 26Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA  931129-960809/HD
Highest Grade: O3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 74A Chemical Officer   GT: NA   EDU: BS Degree   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Kuwait (020214-020829) & Iraq (030205-030605)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM x2, NSM, AFEM, GWOTSM, GWOTEM, ASR, ACM, ICM x2, PUC 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  San Antonio, TX
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 9 February 2005, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2b(5), 4-2c(1), and 4-2c(4), AR 600-8-24, by reason of personal misconduct, nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 and receipt of a Relief for Cause Officer Evaluation Report.  The applicant was directed to show cause for retention in the Army after fraternizing and engaging in sexual activity with an NCO (030601-040418), rendered a false official statement (040419), received a relief for cause OER (040507), received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 (040914), and failed to provide child support as ordered by the civilian court (0409-0501).  He was advised that he could submit a voluntary resignation in lieu of elimination or submit a rebuttal and request an appearance before a Board of Inquiry.  The applicant elected to submit a voluntary resignation in lieu of elimination.  The Ad Hoc Review Board recommended that the applicant’s request for resignation in lieu of elimination be accepted with issuance of a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 30 June 2005, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
         
       The record contains a GOMOR dated 14 September 2004 for improper relationship with an NCO.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 600-8-24 sets forth the basic authority for officer transfers and discharges.  Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for eliminating an officer from the Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security.  AR 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and  the issue, and documents he submitted, the analyst determined that the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  The applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by Army Officers.  By his misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant provided no corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue and determined that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4-2b and 4-24a(1), AR 600-8-24.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unacceptable Conduct", and the separation code is "BNC."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  
       Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remain both proper and equitable. 

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 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 AR20090007971
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages