Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/10/07	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that the discharge he received, from his understanding it was to have been automatically upgraded after 2 years if he had no incidents. He has been out almost 11 years without any problems.  Now with the economy in a bad state, he tried to go back into the Army and was denied. Learning it was due to his discharge not being an honorable and his reentry eligibility (RE) code not being a 1. He feels he has grown and matured enough to better understand the military and would like a second chance for him and his family.  

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: 980929
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 981103   Chapter: 14-12c(1)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKD   Unit/Location: Support Company, 2nd Battalion, 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne), Fort Carson, CO 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 980901, wrongfully and without authority wear upon his uniform the rank of Specialist on or about 980114-980831, reduction to the rank of Private (E-2), forfeiture of $242.00 pay for one month, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 980301, (CG)

Article 15, 980114, willfully disobeyed a lawful order from SGT, a noncommissioned officer x 2 on or about 971003, and again on or about 971203, reduction to Private First Class (E-3), extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG) 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 950627    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 4 Mos, 7 Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 4 Mos, 7 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 33F10 MSE Network SW Systems Oper   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany (dates-NIF)   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, 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 29 September 1998, 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 disobeyed an order from a noncommissioned officer x 2 on or about 971003, and again on or about 971203, wrongfully and without authority wear the rank of Specialist on or between 980114-980831, 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.  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, 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.  
       
       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 the discharge he received, from his understanding it was to have been automatically upgraded after 2 years if he had no incidents.  He has been out almost 11 years without any problems.  He tried to go back into the Army and was denied, learning that it was due to his discharge not being an honorable and his reentry eligibility (RE) code not being a 1.  He feels he has grown and matured enough to better understand the military and would like a second chance for him and his family. 
       
       The US Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges.  Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge.  Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.  The Defense Discharge Review Standards specifically state that no factors should be established that requires automatic change or denial of a change in discharge. 
       
       Additionally, 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.  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.  Notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the analyst found that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, separation authority as AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(1), and block 26 separation code  as "JKD."  In view of the error, the analyst recommends to the Board that an administrative change be made to block 25, separation authority as AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, and block 26 separation code  as "JKQ," as approved by the separation authority.  Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25 and 26, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service, to include the reentry eligibility (RE) code was both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 6 August 2010         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: None submitted by the applicant.

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
Notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, separation authority as AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(1), and block 26 separation code as "JKD."  In view of the error, the Board directs ARBA Support Division St. Louis to correct block 25; to reflect AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c; and block 26; to reflect JKQ, as approved by the separation authority and issue you a new DD Form 214.  Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25 and 26, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 
        
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: No Change
Other: The Board directs ARBA Support Division St. Louis to correct block 25; to reflect AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c; and block 26; to reflect JKQ,and issue a new DD Form 214. 										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change






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 AR20090017713
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages