Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/07/29	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and self-authored statement provided by the applicant.  He provides two statements from his father, one which indicates he has been diagnosed by the Veterans Administration as service connected for depressive disorder/anxiety and has awarded his son disability retroactively to April 1, 2009.

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: 090212
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 090312   Chapter: 14-12c    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: HHC, 1-504th IN Bn, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070709, with intent to deceive provided a false statement to a Fayetteville Police Officer (070325), 14 days of extra duty (Summarized)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  28
Current ENL Date: 081211    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 03Mos, 12Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 09Mos, 00Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 060613-081210/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 42A1P/HR Spc   GT: 97   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (070601-080720)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM w/CS, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Stockbridge, GA
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 12 February 2009, 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 driving under the influence (090201), for multiple failures to report on time to his designated place of duty, for providing a false statement, and for disobeying a lawful order from an NCO, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 12 February 2009, the applicant indicated that he had been given an opportunity to consult 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 Army 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 February 2009, 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 1 December 2009.

       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 and documents 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 analyst noted the applicant’s issue and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.  Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.
       
       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: 21 April 2010         Location: Atlanta, GA

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: [redacted]


Witnesses/Observers: Applicant's father 

Exhibits Submitted: Self-authored statement, fathers statement of support, military documents, awards, DD Form 214, Georgia Department of Veterans Affairs documents (10 pages).

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony 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 AR20090013376
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages