Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/07/28	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, he felt the disciplinary action against him was unjust and unfair.  He committed himself and showed discipline and knowledge of his position, but he was given a discharge that he did not deserve.  He has never received any type of disciplinary action prior to the incident nor has he been in any type of trouble in the military or civilian side.  He served most of his time in Ansbach Germany.  The altercation between him and his daughter’s mother occurred two months after he arrived at Fort Benning, Georgia.  Being new to the company, he felt he wasn’t treated fairly due to the fact that they did not know him as a person or a Soldier.  Since the division was set to deploy in September 2010, instead of helping him they thought it was more convenient to discharge me.  He feels things were blown out of proportion.  Until the date of his discharge he took the initiative to attend anger management and parenting classes, and he had numerous meetings with a counselor to better himself--to show to his command it was a mistake and it would never happen again.  He did not want his military career to end.  After being discharged, he had hoped to one day pick up and continue where he left off.  Even though, he was given a re-entry code of 4, he will still hope for the best that it will be changed.  He feels he deserves an Honorable discharge, because the military gave him a reason to believe in himself as a man, as a son, as father, and as a Soldier.  Being the first man in his family to become a Soldier in the Army was an overwhelming feeling and he loved it.  He loved what he did for his family and his country.  He expresses his appreciation to the Board for taking the time in reviewing his application for an upgrade.

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: 091218
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 100211   Chapter: 14-12c    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: HHT, 3d BSTB, 3d BCT (Rear), 3d ID, Fort Benning, GA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  23
Current ENL Date: 081112    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 03 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 02 Mos, 27 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA (061115-081111) / HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 88M (Motor Transport Opr)   GT: 100   EDU: 11 Years   Overseas: Germany (070418-090509), SWA   Combat: Iraq (070701-080913)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM; MUC; NDSM; ICM-CS

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Newman, GA
Post Service Accomplishments: None
VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 18 December 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for having been arrested for criminal trespassing, battery and cruelty to children (x2), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 22 December 2009, 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 Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 22 January 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge 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 available military records, and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  
       
       This recommendation was made after full consideration of the former Soldier’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  
       
       The analyst determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service to include the steps he took seeking counseling to rehabilitate and remedy the behavior that contributed to his misconduct with the social work services, successfully completing an anger management class, and the final disposition of his court case that was essentially dismissed mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record.  
       
       The analyst also noted the applicant's contention to continue his service to his community.  The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, there is no law or regulation, which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings.  The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.
       
       Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization be upgraded to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. 




VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 22 February 2012         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD 293 w/statement, dated 110725; Letter (Ms. G), dated 101126; Certificate, dated 091119; Med Appointments (090511-100122); Muscogee County GA State Court disposition w/certification, dated 100716. 

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the analyst's recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the applicant’s length and quality of his service were not significantly meritorious to overcome the seriousness of the misconduct and as a result the discharge was found to be proper and equitable and the Board voted to deny relief.  Moreover, the Board found that the nature of the applicant’s misconduct does not warrant the award of an honorable characterization of service.  However, the Board did vote to correct the "Reentry Code" entered as "4" on the applicant's DD 214, block 27, and directed that an administrative change be made to block 27, "Reentry Code" to "3."  
        
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: NA
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

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 AR20110015373
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages