Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/06/01	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states:  "My name is RB  (redacted), currently I am 25 years old.  When I was 17 years old I enlisted with my mothers signature into the Illinois Army National Guard and after successful completion of BCT and AIT and seeing how much I loved the United States Army and being a soldier I switched to Active Army.  During my service, I worked in the SJA Claims office, doing my best to get officers and enlisted the most back from the damage due to a faulty government contracted move.  I took my position serious and came to work every day with a smile knowing I was going to help a member of the Army family.  I was awarded the September (of which ever year I was discharged) Soldier of the Month for HHC USAG III Corps. I had accolades from my NCOIC and prior to the incident that caused my discharge I was planning on applying to flight school, in fact a CW5 whose claim I worked on took me under his wing and was showing me everything I needed to know to pass the test for flight school.  I am homosexual.  I had no sexual physical contact with any males during my time as a soldier in the US Army.  I made the mistake, of, in the privacy of my barrack room doing something that has haunted me to this day.  I masturbated via webcam with another male.  This person printed sexually based conversations and pictures and mailed them to my commander once I refused to exchange money for the copies of what he had on me. I hurt no one.  I was the best soldier I could have been and was on my way to becoming even better.  My service was for others and to this day I'm proud to say that, and I wouldn't change a thing.  I was young, I still am, I was growing, I still am. To this day I work as an EMT because I refuse to stop caring and doing what I know is right.  I respectfully request my discharge be upgraded from general to honorable so I can show that I completed BCT and served my country before what happened.

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: 021206
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 021223   Chapter: 14-12c    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: HHC, USAG, Fort Hood, TX 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 021120, wrongfully and willfully impersonated a warrant officer on divers occasions (020925-020926), wrongfully commit an indecent act by masturbating while on camera (020823), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $552 for two months (one month suspended), 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 020507    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 07Mos, 17Days ?????
Total Service:  		01 Yrs, 01Mos, 09Days Includes inactive service
Previous Discharges: 	ARNG 000727-020506/HD
                                       IADT 010619-011206/UNC
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 27D10/Paralegal Spc   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  San Clemente, CA
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 6 December 2002, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for having received a field grade Article 15 (021120), for impersonating a warrant officer and for indecent acts, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 6 December 2002, the applicant waived his right to legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On             11 December 2002, 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, 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 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 the former Soldier’s 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 applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct", and the separation code is "JKQ."  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.     
       
       Additionally, the analyst noted that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed 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: 31 March 2010         Location: Washington, D.C.

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 AR20090010490
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages