Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/09/15	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, his request for an upgrade is based on the following submission.  Although he was awarded an Article 15 twice on the same day for minor infractions of the UCMJ, he was processed for administrative discharge after serving honorably for over four years which included one voluntary deployment in support of the Global War on Terrorism at the Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility in Cuba.  He no longer has supporting documents, while stationed at Guantanamo Bay, he reenlisted for four years in January 2008 and upon completion of that arduous deployment; he transferred back to the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.  He never received a DD Form 214 for his service up to his reenlistment, nor is it reflective on his current DD Form 214.  Furthermore, he feels he was not properly advised by the Legal Services at Fort Leavenworth, particularly; regarding the two Article 15s executed on the same day.  Had he known and fully understood the ramifications of the discharge characterized as General under Honorable conditions, he would have fought to remain on active duty or at a minimum, would have appealed the Article 15s and the characterization of his discharge with the GCMCA.  Based on his four years of honorable service up to the minor infractions of the UCMJ that resulted in his discharge, his reenlistment (for which he is still repaying his bonus to the U.S. Government), he requests an upgrade in the characterization of his discharge to Honorable.  Given the opportunity, he would reenlist today and serve in any capacity, CONUS, OCONUS, or in any Overseas Contingency Operation.  In support of this application and his board, he requests that the panel procure from the Army records repository, his service record to validate and substantiate his Honorable service and reenlistment.

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: 090526
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 090605   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 526th MP Co, 705th MP Bn (I/R), Fort Leavenworth, KS 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 090128 - failed to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time (081207; disobeyed an NCO (081205); found sleeping while posted as a sentinel (081028) - reduced to E-3; forfeiture of $433; and 14-day extra duty, (CG)

090429 - violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: USDB Reg 190-3, dated 19 February 2008, by failing to properly report an inmate's request for him to mail a correspondence on his behalf - reduced to E-2; forfeiture of $366 (suspended) 14-day extra duty; and oral reprimand, (CG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 050125    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	04 Yrs, 05 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Total Service:  		04 Yrs, 05 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31E (Corrections Spec)   GT: 105   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Cuba   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AGCM; NDSM; GWOTEM; ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 20 May 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconduct: on 081028, he was found asleep at his post while posted as a sentinel; on 081205, having received a lawful order from SSG N to type a two-page essay on the history and tradition of the Army uniform, disobeyed the same; on 081207, he failed to go to his appointed place of duty, to wit: 0415 uniform inspection; on 081125, he violated a lawful general order, to wit: USDB Regulation 190-3, paragraph 2-3, dated 19 February 2008, by failing to properly report Inmate P’s request for him to mail correspondence on his behalf, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 26 May 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 27 May 2009, 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 military records, and 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 the former Soldier’s 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 acknowledges the applicant’s in-service accomplishments and considered the quality of his service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the repeated incidents of misconduct or by the multiple negative counseling statements, and the documented actions under Article 15 of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice.  
       
       Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact the local recruiter to determine 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 if appropriate. 
       
       Further, 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.  
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined 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: 21 March 2012         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated 11 September 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: 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 AR20110018761
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 4 pages