Applicant Name:   

Application Receipt Date: 2012/07/20	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "I believe the General discharge I received was excessive given the circumstances involved.  My record will reflect that I was an excellent Soldier, and my performance evaluations will support this.  Note from my DD 214 that I was awarded the Army Commendation Medal which I received for completing over 900 successful combat missions with my platoon while deployed to Iraq.  You will also note from my record that prior to my DWI [sic] (which was my first) I had no offenses or punishments on my record.  Prior to going on active duty, I served in the US Army Reserve for 1 year which included going to basic training during the summer between my Jr. & Sr. year of school I did so because I consider myself to be very patriotic.  I was promoted to SPC in 18 months, a task that normally takes 24 months.  I do not believe I was afforded due process under the UCMJ regarding my discharge.  When I met with the Company Commander in regards to my DWI [sic], he assigned me to 2 weeks of additional duties, a 50% reduction of pay for one month, and a letter of reprimand from the Commanding General.

Following my punishment, I received word that I was being processed for discharge, and I reported to the JAG office.  A JAG Officer told me to do nothing until I was ordered to ACAP (out processing).   Approximately 4-5 months later I was told to report to ACAP, and was subsequently discharged.  For the 11 months following my meeting with the Company Commander I was assigned menial tasks that primarily centered around mopping the floors.  Even though I was doing this job to the best of my ability I received adverse evaluations that were already produced and dated.  I was not afforded the opportunity to comment on them which I believe was unjust.  Additionally I was never afforded the opportunity for a hearing regarding the discharge processing that was taking place, even after I requested one from the JAG.  On another occasion, I was told to report to the motor pool at a specific date and time (0030 hours) whereupon I did report at that time.  The NCOIC told me I was late and that I should have been there at 2100 hours.  I then called my squad leader and told him that I reported when he had told me to but that the NCOIC said I was late.  He said to not worry about it and come back which I did.  The next morning before PT, my squad leader called me in and had a negative counseling sheet already signed and dated regarding the incident the night before.  When I asked him what was going on, he would not respond."

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: 110804
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 111005   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct, (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 3rd Brigade Special Troops Battalion, 3rd Brigade, Combat Team, Fort Bragg, North Carolina  

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 110223, without authority, failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (110204); disrespectful in language and deportment toward a noncommissioned officer (110204); forfeiture of $495 pay per month for one month, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated (110822); extra duty for 14 days; and an 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: 080702    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	3  Yrs, 3  Mos, 4    Days ?????
Total Service:  		4  Yrs, 5  Mos, 21  Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USAR 070414 - 080701/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31B1P Military Police   GT: 95   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (081201 - 091115)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, ICM w/CSx2, GWOTSM, ASR, CAB

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 4 August 2011, 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, commission of a serious offense, for driving while impaired, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 4 August 2011, 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 9 August 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
       
       The record contains a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated, 10 March 2011.

       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 carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infraction of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offense.  
       
       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 his 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 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 multiple negative counseling statements, and the documented action under Article 15 of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice.
       
       The applicant contends he does not believe he was afforded due process under the UCMJ regarding his discharge; however, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and 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: 30 August 2012         Location: Chicago, Illinois

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 and a DD Form 214

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: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




ARCHIE L. DAVIS III
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 AR20120013601
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 4 pages