Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/09/15	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states "I feel my discharge should be changed because i was a great soldier.  I won awards and was in the same duty station for 4 years.  I was on orders to Korea at the time of my discharge and was about to receive a top secret security clearance.  At the time of my discharge my NCOIC was in school and we had just received a new Battalion Commander.  I love the military and would like my chance to continue to serve my country.  At the time of my discharge also in the unit i was in there where a lot of Drill Sergeants getting in trouble for much more serious infrations, but they were still keeping their rank and position.  I would like my chance just like them to return to Active Duty.  I am in school currently seeking a degree in business administration ephasis in management.  My degree run hand in hand with my old MOS (75B) and the new MOS (42A).  I respetfully ask for a chance to show you all that i deserve to be a solider in the US Army and that i can be a asset."

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: 010723
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 010809   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: Company A, 2nd Battalion, 58th Infantry, Infantry Training Brigade, Fort Benning, GA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 010703, forged the signature of a LTC, for the purpose of obtaining advanced pay in the amount of $899.00 on (010611), reduction to Private (E-1), suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (010903), forfeiture of $521.00 pay per month for 2 months and extra duty for 30 days (FG)

The suspension of the punishment of reduction to Private First Class (E-3) and forfeiture of $332.00 pay per month for one month imposed on (010402) was vacated, effective (010426) based on the applicant's offense of willfully and wrongfully damaged the property of a female of a value of less than $100.00.

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  31
Current ENL Date: Reenl/000809    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	1 Yrs, 0 Mos, 1 Days ?????
Total Service:  		4 Yrs, 0 Mos, 23 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 970717-000808/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 75B10 Personnel Admin Spec   GT: 109   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM (6), GCMDL, NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states in his issue that he is currenntly in school seeking a degree in business administration with the emphasis in management.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 23 July 2001, 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 for damaging private property and forged the battalion commander's signature so that he could receive advance pay.  The unit commander recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights. 
       
       On 25 July 2001, 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 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 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 a great soldier; won some awards and was in the same duty station for 4 years.  He was on orders to Korea at the time of his discharge and was about to receive a top secret security clearance.  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.  
       
       The applicant further contends that at the time of his discharge in the unit he was in, there where a lot of Drill Sergeants getting in trouble for much more serious infractions, but they were still keeping their rank and position.  He would like to return to Active Duty.  The analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Further, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  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.   
       
       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: 20 May 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Online application dated 2 June 2010.

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 AR20100021783
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages