Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/03/31	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that at the time of his discharge he was instructed to apply for an upgrade and it would be granted because he completed his initial three year contract honorable.  However, he was given a general, under honorable conditions discharge on the 28 December 2005, after serving 3 years, and 2 months of his enlistment.

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: 051205
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 051228   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: US Army Medical Department Activity, Heidelberg, Germany 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051117, wrongfully used marijuana between (050801-050831), forfeiture of $617.00 pay per month for two months and extra duty for 45 days (FG)

050128, wrongfully used marijuana between (050324-050422), reduction to the grade of private (E-2) and extra duty for 45 days (FG)

031124, drunk and disorderly, which conduct was of a nature to bring discredit upon the Army (030717), and wrongfully communicated a threat to his wife to kill her on (030717), extra duty for 10 days (FG)

050908, unlawfully struck a SPC in the face on (050514), reduction to Private (E-1) and extra duty for 45 days (CG)

050502, disrespectful in language towards a SGT, a noncommissioned officer on (050306), (The DA Form 2627 continuation sheet is not in the file), reduction to the grade of Private First Class (E-3), forfeiture of $361.00 pay per month for one month, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (051029), restriction and extra duty for 14 days (CG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 020925    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  The applicant extended his enlistment for a period of 8 months on (030530) giving him a new ETS date of: (060524).
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 3 Mos, 4 Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 3 Mos, 4 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 91M10 Nutrition Care Spec   GT: 109   EDU: GED Cert   Overseas: Germany (030527-051228)   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR

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 1December 2005, 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 did on 9 March 2004 used vulgar language towards a non-commissioned officer which was witnessed by another non-commissioned officer, received formal counseling for this action on 16 March 2004, on 29 July 2004 he overdrafted a check for $1800.00 with reluctance to repay the financial institution.  
       
       He received a bar to reenlistment for this action on 24 September 2004, on 6 March 2005 he received multiple USAREUR traffic violations and formal counseling for this on 8 March 2005.  Between on or about 24 March 2005 and 22 April 2205, he wrongfully used marijuana for which he received nonjudicial punishment for this offense on 28 June 2005. 
       
       Additionally, on 14 May 2005, he unlawfully struck another soldier and received nonjudicial punishment for the offense on 8 September 2005, between 01 August 2005 and 3 1 August 2005, he wrongfully used marijuana and received nonjudicial punishment for this on 17 November 2005.  The unit commander recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights. 
       
       On 5 December 2005, 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 5 December 2005, 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 at the time of his discharge he was instructed to apply for an upgrade and it would be granted because he completed his initial three year contract honorably.  However, he was given a general, under honorable conditions discharge on the 28 December 2005, after serving 3 years, and 2 months of his enlistment.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of three years on the 25th of September 2002, according to his DD Form 4/3 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document/Armed Forces of the United States).  Subsequently, while stationed in Heidelberg, Germany the applicant extended his enlistment on the 30th of May 2003, for a period of 8 months, which gave him a new expiration term of service (ETS) date of: 24 May 2006, because he wanted to meet the service remaining requirements SRR for "with dependents" tour to Europe under paragraph 4-9a, Chapter 4, AR 601-280.  The applicant's misconduct as evident in the record did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.   
       
       Furthermore, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the analyst found that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, separation authority as “AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c,” block 26 as separation code “JKQ,” and block 28, narrative reason for separation as “Misconduct (Serious Offense)”   In view of the foregoing, the analyst recommends to the Board that an administrative change be made to block 25, to read separation authority:  “AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b,” block 26, separation code to read "JKA," block 27, and block 28, reason for separation to read “Pattern of Misconduct” as it was approved by the separation authority.  
       
       Except for the foregoing modifications, 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: 2 november 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 7 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.  

Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, separation authority as “AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c”, block 26 separation code as “JKQ”, block 27, and block 28, narrative reason for separation as "Misconduct (Serious Offense)."  In view of these errors, the Board voted to administratively change block 25, separation authority to “AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b”, block 26, separation code to “JKA”, and block 28, narrative reason for separation to "Pattern of Misconduct" as approved by the separation authority.  Except for the foregoing modifications, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.












        
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: block 25, separation authority to “AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b”, block 26, separation code to “JKA”, and block 28, narrative reason for separation to "Pattern of Misconduct."  
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 AR20110006110
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 4 pages