Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/05/13	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, " that his discharge may be improper do to the fact that he was highly medicated on pain meds and do not remember most of what was going on around him and his actions were unintentional."

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: 000925
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 001004   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 208th Signal Company, 108th Air Defense Artillery Brigade, Fort Bliss, TX 

Time Lost: AWOL x 1, for 21 days from (000830-000919). The applicant returned to his unit.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 000710, Disrespectful in language toward (SGT), a noncommissioned officer on or about 000622; disobeyed a lawful order from (SGT), a noncommissioned officer on or about 000622; reduction in grade to Private (E-2); forfeiture of pay and extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG)

Article 15; 000126, Dereliction of duty; in that he willfully and without authority travel outside of the 300 mile radius of Fort Bliss, TX, which is a direct violation of the 108th Commander's leave policy on or about 990801; reduction to Private (E-2) and extra duty for 14 days (CG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 980715    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 1 Mos, 29 Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 1 Mos, 29 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31U10 Signal Support System Spec   GT: 102   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: 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 30 August 2000, 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 did on 22 June 2000 was disrespectful toward a superior noncommissioned officer on two occasions; failed to obey a lawful order given by a superior noncommissioned officer; on 14 May 2000 he was derelict in the performance of his duties, and failed to be at his appointed place of duty; on 1 August 1999 he was derelict in the performance of his duties; on 29 June 1999 he was disrespectful toward his superior noncommissioned officers; on 17 June 1999 he was disrespectful toward a superior noncommissioned officer and failed to obey a lawful order given to him by a superior noncommissioned officer, 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.  On 28 September 2000, 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.  
       
       Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that his discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Further, before initiating action to separate the applicant, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about the deficiencies, which could lead to separation. 
       
       The analyst noted the command made an assessment of the applicant's potential for becoming a fully satisfactory soldier.  The evidence of record established that the applicant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome noted deficiencies.  As the applicant did not subsequently conform to required standards of discipline and performance, the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service.  Therefore, 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: 10 March 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 AR20090008883
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages