Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/12/11	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, he was discharged from the military for financial reasons. He was not discharged for conduct or for not reporting for duty. He was a good Soldier and never wanted out. He was young and ignorant at the time and go himself in a mess which he could not get out off. It has been 10 years since then and he wants to be able to continue on with his life and correct some of his mistakes. Leaving the Army the way he did was the worst thing that he could have ever done. These days he is studying and trying to get his life together and hopefully who ever reads this can understand that we all make mistakes and all he is asking is to get this upgrade and continue on with his life. He has kids and it would mean a lot to him to see them see that there dad got an honorable discharge.   

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: 000322
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 000426   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Company, 1st Battalion, 41st Infantry Regiment, Fort Riley, KS 

Time Lost: Military confinement from (990611-990617) for a total of 7 days; as part of his sentence from a Summary Court-Martial.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 991020, failed to go to his appointed place of duty on or about (991001); failed to obey a lawful general regulation, by wrongfully driving his personal vehicle without a valid driver's license, proof of insurance, and current vehicle registration on or about (990921); forfeiture of $479.00 pay per month for one month; extra duty for 35 days, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated on or before (000118); and extra duty for 10 days (FG)

Article 15, 990426, failed to go to his appointed place of duty on or about (990408); reduction to Private (E-1); forfeiture of $479.00 pay per month for 2 months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG)

Article 15, 981215, without authority, absent himself from his unit on or about (981116-981117); reduction to Private (E-2); forfeiture of $242.00 pay, suspended, if not vacated by (990315); extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG)

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 990611, Summary Court-Martial for breaking restriction on (990509). He was sentenced to be confined for 7 days and forfeiture of $479.00 pay per month for one month.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  22
Current ENL Date: 971031    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 5 Mos, 19 Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 5 Mos, 19 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11M10 FV Infantryman   GT: 111   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant stated in his issue that he is studying and trying to get his life together for his kids.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 16 March 2000, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of a pattern of misconduct; in that he received a Company Grade Article 15 on (981215) for going AWOL; a Field Grade Article 15 on (990426) for failing to report to duty; a Summary Court-Martial on (990611) for breaking restriction; and a Company Grade Article 15 for failing to report for duty and driving his POV without a valid license, 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.  On 30 March 2000, 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 Bar to Reenlistment, which was approved on 17 March 2000.  

       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 was young and ignorant at the time and got himself in a mess which he could not get out of.  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.   
       
       The applicant further contends that he was not discharged for conduct or for not reporting for duty; and he was a good Soldier and never wanted out.  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.  
       Additionally, the evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of nonjudicial punishment.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.
       
       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: 15 September 2010         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Online application dated 2 December 2009 and a copy of his DD Form 214 for the period of service ending 26 April 2000.

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: No Change										
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 AR20100008434
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages