Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/01/15	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he is seeking VA benefits and an upgrade is needed.  He was a combat life saver also, he was a great Soldier when it came to doing missions. Even though he missed behaved, he still keep his warrior ethos in mind. He also was Soldier of the month at one time. So if the board can find it in there heart to give him another chance, because he really needs this.  

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: 060925
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 061229   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: 159th Port Operations Cargo Company, 11th Transportation Battalion, 7th Transportation Group, Fort Story, VA 

Time Lost: Civil confinement from (061107-061206) for a total of 30 days. The applicant was released to his unit. 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060615, unlawfully struck a PFC 10-20 times with a closed fist on or about (060405), extra duty and restriction for 45 days (Summarized)

Article 15, 060525, failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 2 on or about (060323), (060324), and wrongfully used cocaine between on or about (060321-060324), reduction to Private (E-1), forfeiture of $636.00 pay per month for 2 months, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (060823), extra duty and restriction for 45 days, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (060823), Oral reprimand ((FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  25
Current ENL Date: 050310    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	1 Yrs, 8 Mos, 20 Days ?????
Total Service:  		1 Yrs, 8 Mos, 20 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 88H10 Cargo Spec   GT: 92   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR

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 25 September 2006, 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 was arrested and convicted by the civil authorities for driving while intoxicated in September 2005, on or about (060324) he tested positive for cocaine, repeatedly failed to report to his appointed place of duty, unlawfully struck another Soldier 10-20 times with his fist on (060405), he was apprehended by authorities for possessing marijuana on (060908), also, he was arrested again for driving under the influence, refusing a breathalyzer, driving on a suspended drivers license, and running a stop sign endangering others lives, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights. 
       
       The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily submitted a conditional waiver of his rights to an administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditions discharge 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 commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 12 October 2006, the separation authority disapproved the applicant's conditional waiver and referred his case to the administrative separation board.  The applicant was notified to appear before the board and advised of his rights.  On 21 November 2006, the board met; the applicant appeared with his counsel.  The board recommended separation from the Army with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 15 December 2006, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendation of the board, waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.
       
       The applicant received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated 21 September 2006, for driving while intoxicated on (060909).  Also, the record contains two Military Police Reports dated 11 April 2006 and 13 September 2005 in reference to the applicant's offenses of possession of marijuana, driving while intoxicated and drunk driving. 

       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 which 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 he is seeking VA benefits and needs his discharge upgraded.  The analyst considered the applicant’s quality of service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge.  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: 1 October 2010         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 29 December 2009.

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: NoChange										
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 AR20100001124
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 3 pages