Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/03/15	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he is going back to school and to get the funding he needs, his discharge needs to be upgraded to honorable and he also thinks that the discharge was a little too harsh.  

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: 991014
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 991119   Chapter: 13       AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory performance	   RE:     SPD: JHJ   Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Company, 305th Military Intelligence Battalion, 111th Military Intelligence Brigade, Fort Huachuca, AZ 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 990329, failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 3 (990301), (990309), (990322), extra duty for 7 days (Summarized)

990524, failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 5 (990430), (990505), (990507), (990510), (990512), reduction to private (E-1), suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (991119), forfeiture of $223.00 pay per month for one month, extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG).

The suspension of the punishment of reduction to Private (E-1) imposed on (990524), was vacated based on the applicant's offense of failing to go to his appointed place of duty on (990804).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 990125    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	0 Yrs, 9 Mos, 25 Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 3 Mos, 28 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USAR 970722-971015/NA
                                       ADT    971016-980227/NA
                                       USAR 980228-990124/NA
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92Y10 Unit Supply Spec   GT: 89   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  D
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 4 October 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance for numerous counselings for failing to report, received a Summarized Article 15 for failing to report for duty on two occassions on (990329), received a Compamy Grade Article 15 for failing to report for duty on five occassions on (990524) and the suspended punishment imposed on (990524) was vacated for failing to report for duty on (990813) with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 6 October 1999, 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 Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.   
       
       On 19 October 1999, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was not transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.  Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a fully honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.

       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.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incidents of unsatisfactory performance.  
       
       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 unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he is going back to school and to get the funding he needs, his discharge needs to be upgraded to honorable.  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 Post-9/11 or 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: 5 October 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 10 March 2011.

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 AR20110005024
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 3 pages