Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/06/15	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 149 submitted by the applicant in lieu of a DD Form 293.

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: 081118
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 081205   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: E Forward Support Company, 1st Battalion, 12th Cavalry Regiment, 3rd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX 

Time Lost: AWOL x 1, for 25 days from (080807-080831). The applicant returned to his unit.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070904; Failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 4, on or about 070808; 070809; 070810; 070817; disobeyed a lawful order from (SGT), a noncommissioned officer, on or about 070805; reduction to Private (E-1); suspended to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 071214; and extra duty for 14 days (CG)

Article 15; 070614, Failed to go to his appointed place of duty on or about 070502; the DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ) continuation sheet, which list the rest of the charges is not part of the available record; however, his punishment consisted of reduction to Private (E-2); forfeiture of $363.00 pay and extra duty for 14 days (CG)

Article 15; 080723, Disrespectful in language toward a noncommissioned officer on or about 080619; disrespectful in deportment toward (SGT), a noncommissioned officer on or about 080410; disobeyed a lawful order from (SGT), a noncommissioned officer x 5, on or about 080331; 080318; 080215; 080207; 070911; and with intent to deceive, made an official statement to a 1SG, which was false on or about 071023; reduction to Private (E-2); forfeiture of $363.00 pay, 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:  17
Current ENL Date: 060810    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  26 Weeks (The applicant required two moral waivers at the time of enlistment, which was approved on (060713) and (060715). 
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 2 Mos, 11 Days The net active service this period on the DD Form 214, block 12c is incorrect; should be: 2 Years, 2 Months, 11 Days
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 2 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 63B10 Wheeled Vehicle Mech   GT: 102   EDU: GED Cert   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (060630-070830)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ICMw/Campaign Star, ASR, OSR 




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 10 December 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct, 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 28 January 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. 
       
       The record contains a Military Police Report dated 3 November 2008.

       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 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 servcie 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 contention that he was going through some personal issues; however, the analyst determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues while on active duty through which he could have obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. 
       
       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: 26 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 AR20090010586
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 3 pages