Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/23	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 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: 030406
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 030515   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: Bravo Company, 8th Engineer Battalion, Engineer Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX. 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 030409; Failed to go to his appointed place of duty on or about 030301; disobeyed a lawful command from a CPT, on or about 030321; broke restriction on or about 030321; reduction to Private (E-1); forfeiture of $575.00 pay per month for two months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG) 

Article 15; 030228, Failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 6, on or about 021127; 021206; 030110; 030113; 030115; 030115; absent from his unit on or about 030104 until on or about 030105; disobeyed a lawful order from a SSG on or about 021220; found drunk on duty as a noncommissioned officer on or about 030131; reduction to (E-4); forfeiture of $875.00 pay per month for two months; (suspended to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 28 August 2003); extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG)

The suspension of the punishment of forfeiture of $875.00 pay per month for two months imposed on 030228 was vacated, effective 030328, based on the applicant's offense of failing to go to his appointed place of duty on or about 030301. 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  24
Current ENL Date: Reenl/000329    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 1 Mos, 17 Days ?????
Total Service:  		6 Yrs, 1 Mos, 18 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 970328-000328/HD
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 25U1P Signal Support Systems Spec   GT: 103   EDU: GED Cert   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, GCMDL, NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
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 15 April 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of a pattern of misconduct; in that he failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 2, on or about 021127; 021206; disobeyed a lawful order from a (SSG) noncommissioned officer on or about 021220; without authority absent himself from his unit on or about 030104 until 030105; failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 4, on or about 030110; 030113; 030115; 030115; found drunk while on duty as a noncommissioned officer on or about 030131; failed to go to his appointed place of duty on or about 030301; disobeyed a lawful command from a (CPT) superior commissioned officer on or about 030321; and broke restriction on or about 030321, 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, 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 23 April 2003, 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, and the issue submitted with the 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 applicant's service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his 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.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.  Further, if the applicant desires to reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his eligibility to reenlist.  Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes.  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: 1 February 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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090008110
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages