Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/12/04	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting submitted by the applicant.

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: 080127
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080304   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHC, 2nd Bn, 503rd IN, Vicenza, Italy 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080120, disrespecting a noncommissioned officer x4 (071227, 071221 and 071207 x2) and disobeying a noncommissioned officer x4 (071227 and 071207 x3); reduced to E1, forfeiture of $720 for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).

071102, failure to report (070805) disrespecting a noncommissioned officer x3 (070805, 071025 and 071026) and disobeying a noncommissioned officer (070805); reduction to E2, forfeiture of $363 for one month and extra duty for 14 days, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated by 2 May 06 (CG).


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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  25
Current ENL Date: 060405    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	1 Yrs, 11Mos, 0Days ?????
Total Service:  		1 Yrs, 11Mos, 0Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10 Infantryman   GT: 91   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Italy   Combat: Afghanistan (dates NIF)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ACM, GWOTSM, ASR, NATO, CIB, PRCHT 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None provided by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
             The evidence of record shows that on 25 January 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for receiving a Field Grade Article 15 for disrespecting NCOs on four occasions ( 071227, 071221, 071207 x2), for disobeying the lawful orders from four NCOs (071227 and 071207 x3), for receiving a Company Grade Article 15 (070805), for being disrespectful to three NCOs (070805, 071025, 071026) and for disobeying the lawful order of a NCO (070805), 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 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 30 January 2008, 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 issue 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.  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 acknowledges the applicant's diagnosis of PTSD outlined in the 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 when he committed the misconduct that caused the unit commander to initiate the separation action.

           Additionally, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct", and the separation code is "JKA."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  

         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:  1 February 2010         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: N/A

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


								         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 AR20090021384
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages