Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/10/23	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting documents

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: 060805
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 061014   Chapter: 14-12B      AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHC, 1st AR Div, APO, AE 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060809, fail to go at the time prescribed  to your appointed place x2 (060717 and 060720); disobeyed a lawful command from a superior commissioned officer (060626); disrespectful in language towards a noncommissioned officer (060626) and disobeyed a lawful command from a noncommissioned officer (060719); reduction to E2, forfeiture of $333 pay for one month, extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG).

060329, fail to go at the time prescribed  to your appointed place (060126); reduction to E3, forfeiture of $394 suspended to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 060925, 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:  18
Current ENL Date: 020610    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	04 Yrs, 04Mos, 05Days ?????
Total Service:  		04 Yrs, 05Mos, 05Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 14R10/Bradley Crewman   GT: 122   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany, SWA   Combat: Iraq (030513-040421)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, VUA, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, OSR, CAB

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  West Concord, MN
Post Service Accomplishments: In the record the applicant has an approved waiver to join the MNARNG on 070529.  He signed a contract on (070614) for 3 years, 7 months and 25 days.  The applicant has been promoted to E3 in the MNARNG.  Further, in the file the applicant was discharged from the ARNG on 080625 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge and assigned to the USARCG.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 28 August 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 12-b, AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconduct in that he received an company grade Article 15 for two specifications of failure to be at your appointed place; disobeyed a superior commissioned officer; disrespectful language toward a noncommissioned officer; and disobeyed a noncommissioned officer on (060809); being counseled for assault and battery on (060620); being counseled for failure to be at your appointed place on (060612); received a company grade article 15 for failure to be at your appointed place on (060329); being counseled for violation of a no-alcohol order on (060419) and being counseled for failure to be at your appointed place on (060112), 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 submitted 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 September 2006, 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 issues and documents he submitted, 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.  Before initiating action to separate him from the Army, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about the deficiencies, which could lead to separation.  The analyst noted the command made an assessment of the applicant's potential for becoming a fully satisfactory Soldier.  The evidence of record established that the applicant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome noted deficiencies.  As the applicant did not subsequently conform to required standards of discipline and performance, the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service.  Furthermore, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the diagnosis of PTSD outlined in Department of Veterans Affairs documents with his application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted, the applicant fully understood the difference between right and wrong.  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: 18 November 2009         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: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090018697
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages