Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/06/16	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that "after four years and having the opportunity to become an executive in the private sector, working for a Clearinghouse in Puerto Rico, I have been offered to work for the VA Hospital at the Orlando Offices. This being a great opportunity for me I would like to turn in all my documentation to include, if possible, an upgrade of my discharge, for I am in great shame of such. 

I spent six years in the army and became an NCO right before a divorce, at a young age, becoming a parent, circumstances that at the time was not mature enough to handle as I would now. My goal is to continue to serve, since I have attempted various occasions to re-enlist, however until this point I have been unsuccesful. Even If I never again recieve the opportunity to finish my career as a soldier, here by this application I send the request for an upgrade in my discharge document."

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: 050126
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 050308   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct-Commission of a Serious Offense	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Company (Rear), Brigade Troops Battalion, Division Support Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division, Fort Stewart, GA 

Time Lost: AWOL x 1, for 21 days from (040311-040401). The applicant returned to his unit.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040524, AWOL on or about 040311-040401; operated a passenger car, while drunk on or about 040417; reduction to the grade of SPC (E-4); forfeiture of $907.00 pay per month for two months;, the second month is suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 041129; extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG) 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 990316    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	5 Yrs, 10 Mos, 22 Days The net active service this period on the DD Form 214, block 12c, is incorrect, should be: 5 Years, 10 Months; 22 days, as shown above.  The applicant has a period of AWOL, which was not annotated in block 29 "Time Lost" on the DD Form 214.
Total Service:  		5 Yrs, 10 Mos, 22 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 25U10 Signal Support System Spec   GT: 107   EDU: 13 Years   Overseas: Germany (dates-NIF)   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, GCMDL, NDSM, GWTSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant stated in his issue that he has become an executive in the private sector, working for a Clearinghouse in Puerto Rico.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 26 January 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense; in that he received multiple DUI's, 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 17 February 2005, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 
       
       The record contains two General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand's (GOMOR) for drunken driving, speeding, and driving while his license was suspended dated 6 December 2004, (Administrative).
       
       General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for speeding, drunken driving, expired tags and eluding a military police officer dated 29 April 2004, (Administrative).
       
       Also, the record contains a Military Police Report dated 29 October 2004.
       

       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.  
       
       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 analyst determined that 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 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 that he was at a young age and he was not mature enough to handle the circumstances he was going through; however, the analyst found that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  The analyst further found no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. 
       
       The applicant had had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.  The Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       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. 
       
       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: 28 April 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 AR20090010422
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages