Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/05/08	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "The reason I believe my discharge should be changed is because at the time I was 20 yrs old.  I was not use to any discipline.  The unit I was stationed at was not accustomed to having lower ranking enlisted soldiers.  I was told it was the first time the unit had anybody stationed to the unit lower than an E-4.  I feel that the lack of supervision due to the A.I.T. program allowed me to have way to much time on my hands.  I was out of control and just did not get the consequences that were recieved.  I feel my immaturity was the reason I was in trouble and I worked hard after my discharge to change my life.  I attended East Carolina University and am paying the tuition back.  It has been a struggle lately due to the current economic crisis.  The "misconduct" also prevented me to rejoin the military after 9/11/01 and currently last month.  I would like to redo my wrongs by rejoining the military and being the best soldier I can be".

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: 960613
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 960928   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: B Battery, 1-78th FA, Ft Sill, OK 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 950425, fail to be accountable for the first formation of the day on (960425); 14 days extra duty and 14 days restriction and oral reprimand (CG).

(date illegible); with the intent to deceive, sign an official record (DD Form 1172 in which he put a false birthdate) on (940601); 14 days restriction and 14 days extra duty (CG).

960522, failed to be at the 0530 formation on (960515); reduction to E3, forfeiture of $250, suspended for 90 days, 14 days restriction and 14 days extra duty, suspended for 90 days (CG).

960530, vacation of suspension, for breaking restriction on (960529); forfeiture of $250 and 14 days extra duty (CG). 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 960314    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 03Mos, 15Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 07Mos, 17Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 931112-960313/HD (Immediate enlistment)
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B10/Cannon Crewman   GT: 113   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR



V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states that he attended college.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 12 June 1996, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for pattern of misconduct in that he violated the limits of restriction per Article 15 of Article 134, UCMJ; knowingly falsified information (birthdate) on a DD Form 1172 in violation of Article 107, UCMJ; failure to make formations; and failure to pass the APFT, 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 24 June 1996, 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 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 during the period of enlistment under review and the issues he submitted, the analyst determined that the applicant’s characterization of service is improper.  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 of record shows that the separation approving authority considered nonjudicial punishment from a prior period of honorable service in characterizing the applicant’s discharge.  Consideration of such evidence is improper unless the applicant is granted a fully honorable characterization of service.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends that relief be granted in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined that the narrative reason for discharge to include the reentry eligibility code 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: 7 December 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: Mother 

Exhibits Submitted: None





VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the characterization of service was improper.  The evidence of record shows that the separation approving authority considered nonjudicial punishment from a prior period of honorable service in characterizing the applicant’s discharge.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief by changing the characterization of service to fully honorable.  The Board determined that the narrative reason for discharge to include the reentry eligibility code was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 5    No change 0
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 AR20090008163
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages