Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/07/15	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant in effect states he wants a upgrade of his characterization of service; desires to reenlist; and request correction of items on DD Form 214.

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: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 051231   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: HHC, 16th Eng Bn, Giessen, Germany 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  20
Current ENL Date: 041024    Current ENL Term: 05 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 02Mos, 08Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 06Mos, 19Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-020612-041023/HD
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 21B10/Combat Engineer   GT: 99   EDU: GED   Overseas: Germany, Southwest Asia    Combat: Iraq (Period of service not found in the available records).
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Sandersville, GA
Post Service Accomplishments: Going to college to get a Motor Controls Technician Certificate.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       Evidence of record shows that 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—commission of a serious offense for repeatedly disrespecting several noncommissioned and commissioned officers between (051020 and 051024); and threatening the lives of himself and his commanding 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.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 13 December 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.

       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, 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, the documents, and issues 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 his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By his 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 acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many inservice accomplishments outlined with the application and in the documents with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  
       
       Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant wants to reenlist.  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact the local recruiter to determine 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 if appropriate.  
       
       Reference the applicant's issues that serveral mistakes have been made on his DD Form 214.  These issues do not fall within the purview of this Board.  The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), utilizing DD Form 149 regarding these matters.  An application for that Board can be obtained online or from the Veterans Administration.
       
       In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the characterization of service and reason for discharge 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 May 2010         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Self authored letter (2 pages), DD Form 214-Automated, AGCM Orders, Driver Badge Orders, Certificate of Achievement, Honorable Discharge Certificate, Oath of Reenlistment Certificate, ARCOM Certificate,  Certificates from Sandersville Technical College for Motor Controls and Programmable Control Technician.

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





























Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090012453
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages