Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/07/08	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he takes full responsibility for the isolated incident that led to the current characterization of his discharge.  He is asking the board to make a decision taking into account the positive character of his overall service along with the character that he has continued to demonstrate since his discharge. 

Since his discharge he has done nothing short of displaying the kind of character that would make the Army proud to be called one of its former Soldiers.  He has continued to work with the Department of Defense in law enforcement and has included endorsements from his supervisors denoting his service.  

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: 990726
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 990910   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Troop, 3rd Squadron, 4th Cavalry Aviation Regiment, 25th Infantry Division (Light), Wheeler Army Airfield, HI. 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 990409, assaulted his wife (990309), and unlawfully struck a child on the head with a portable telephone under the age of 16 years (990309), reduction to Private (E-2), forfeiture of $527.00 pay per month for 2 months, extra duty and restriction for 30 days, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (990609), (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: 970530    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  The applicant extended his period of enlistment for 6 months on (980902) giving him a new ETS date of: (011129).
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 3 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 3 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 96B10 Intelligence Analyst   GT: 100   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii (981005-990910)   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant stated in his issue that he works with the Department of Defense in law enforcement.  



VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 23 July 1999, 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 assaulted his wife and son (990309), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 26 July 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 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 24 August 1999, 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 CID Report of Investigation in reference to the applicant's two offenses of assault dated 9 March 1998.

       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, the issue and documents 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 takes full responsibility for the isolated incident that led to the current characterization of his discharge.  He is asking the board to make a decision taking into account the positive character of his overall service along with the character that he has continued to demonstrate since his discharge.
       
       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, even though the applicant takes full responsibility for the single incident, the analyst concluded that the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. 
       
       Having examined all the circumstances, the analyst determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  
       
       The applicant further contends that since his discharge he has done nothing short of displaying the kind of character that would make the Army proud to be called on of its former Soldiers.  He has continued to work with the Department of Defense in law enforcement and has included endorsements from his supervisors denoting his service. 
       
       The analyst noted the applicant’s letters and other documents with his application outlining his successful accomplishments since separation from active duty.  The applicant is to be commended for his efforts.  However, these accomplishments do not provide the Board a basis upon which to grant relief.
       
       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: 18 January 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 21 June 2011, two character reference letters dated 9 June 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						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
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

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder















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 AR20110014244
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages