PART II - APPLICATION DATA

(Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy)

1.  Character of Discharge:  GD

2.  Date of discharge (or REFRAD):  940104

3.  Authority for separation:

	a.  Regulation:  Chapter 14, AR 635-200

	b.  Reason:  Misconduct

4.  Prior review(s):  NONE

PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

1.	Service data:                              2.  Awards and decorations:
			                          NDSM                       
a.  Period entered for: 4 Years                ASR
b.  Entry date: 910205                         OSR      
c.  Age: 18  Years   DOB: 720426                                                 
d.  Educational level:  HS Grad                                                 
e.  Aptitude area score:
	    GT: 113                                3.  Highest grade achieved:
    f.  Length of Service:                         E3
        2 Years  11 Months  0 Days                
                                                  
                                               4.  Performance evaluations:  
                                                   NONE

PART III - SERVICE HISTORY
SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued

5.  Periods of unauthorized absence:  NONE
                                                                    
    Status       Inclusive dates                       
	AWOL                                                               

	Mil conf                                                           

	Civil conf                                                         

	Other                                                              

6.  Nonjudicial punishment:  

	Date 	Offense(s)
	910725	Failure to repair, 2 specifications; (910725); (summarized)
	920108	FTG (911219)
	930203	FTG, 7 specifications; (930122); (930121); (930120); (920909); (920902); (920804)
	930830	Operate a vehicle while drunk (930806)

	_____________________________________________________________________
	930811	Letter of reprimand-driving under the influence of alcohol (administrative)

7.  Court-Martial data:  NONE

	a.  SCM:  
		Date   Offense(s)

	b.  SPCM:  
		Date   Offense(s)

	c.  GCM:	 
		Date   Offense(s)

8.	Remarks:  Bar to Reenlistment, dated 15 January 1992.

SECTION B - Prior Service Data
NONE

Other discharge(s):

	Service	From	To	Type Discharge

PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l.  Facts and Circumstances:

	a.  The evidence of record shows that on 16 November 1993, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct, with a recommendation for a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD).  The applicant was advised of his rights, consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in his own behalf. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a GD.  On 13 December 1993, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a GD.  

	b.  On 4 January 1994, the applicant was discharged with a GD.  At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 2 years and 11 months of active military service.

	c.  The applicant’s records show that he completed almost 3 years of service, and that the highest rank he attained while on active duty was private first class/E-3.  There are no documented acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition contained in the record.  However, there is an extensive disciplinary history which includes the applicant’s acceptance of four Article 15’s:  the first on 25 July 1991, summarized, for two specifications of failure to go to his prescribed place of duty (FTG); the second on 8 January 1992, for FTG; the third on 3 February 1993, for seven specifications of FTG, his punishment for these offenses included a reduction to private/E-2; and the fourth on 30 August 1993, for operating a vehicle while drunk which included a reduction to private/E-1.  The record also shows that the applicant was barred from reenlistment on 15 January 1992 based on the FTG incidents outlined in the July 91 and January 1992 Article 15’s and for writing two bad checks.  The unit commander processed the applicant for separation based on a pattern of misconduct, citing the applicant’s extensive disciplinary history as the basis for taking the action.

2.  Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action:  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter l4 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, 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, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.

SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS

1.  Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel.
    As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293.

2.  Exhibit(s) submitted:
	A-1:  DD Form 293, dated 990416.
	A-2:  Counsel Issues:  NONE
	B-l:  Other Documents: NONE

PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED)

SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion

Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor      ( ) Legal Advisor

      a.  Medical prehearing comments (if applicable):

      b.  Legal prehearing comments (if applicable):

PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING

SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits

1.  Review/hearing information:

	a. Type requested:
	   ( X ) Records review             (   ) Hearing

	b. Type Held:
	   ( X )Records review              (   ) Hearing
	                                    (   ) Tender Offer

	c. Review/hearing location and date:  Washington, DC on 2 June 1999.

	d. Appearance by:
	   Applicant                 (   ) Yes   ( X ) No
	   Counsel                   (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

	e.  Applicant testified:     (   ) Yes   ( X ) No
	
	f.  Counsel presentation:    (   ) Yes   ( X ) No
	
	g.  Witness(es) testified:   (   ) Yes   ( X ) No
	                                                
2.  Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing:  

PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS

1.  a.  Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity:

	    ( X )	Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A of this case report and directive.
	    (   )	Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as follows:
	    (   )	Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as follows:

	b.  Request:  ( X ) Recharacterization     (   ) Change of Reason

2.  Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on issues of propriety and/or equity:

	a.  Propriety:	The applicant has not submitted an issue of propriety and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an issue of propriety to change the discharge.

	b.  Equity:	The parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI, Paragraph 1, above.

        (1), (2), and (4)  The issues are rejected.  The Board noted the applicant’s contentions that, in effect, his discharge was based on one Article 15 in 35 months of service; that he should have been allowed to finish his tour based on his overall good conduct; and that he hopes that his discharge can be upgraded.  However, after carefully reviewing the applicant’s record of service for the period of enlistment under review, the Board concluded that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate.  The evidence of record shows the applicant had an extensive disciplinary history which supported the unit commander’s decision to take separation action based on a pattern of misconduct.  The Board concluded that the applicant’s misconduct was not mitigated by prior or subsequent service of sufficient merit to warrant an upgrade of the discharge being reviewed.  The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.

         (3)  The issue is rejected.  The Board noted the applicant’s contention that, in effect, he would like his discharge upgraded so he can receive his Montgomery GI Bill in order to pursue his college education.  However, eligibility for veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill, does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance with this issue.

3.  Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s):  NONE

PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote

1.	Board conclusion(s):

	The discharge was:

	( X )	Proper.
	(   )	Improper as to characterization.  Change characterization to                                     .
	(   )	Improper as to reason.  Change reason to                         under                      .

	( X )	Equitable.
	(   )	Inequitable as to characterization.  Change characterization to                               .
	(   )	Inequitable as to reason.  Change reason to                       
		under                                 .
	(   )	Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should be changed to                      under                         .

2.  Voting record:      Change   No Change
	            Reason       0         5  
    Characterization       0         5   

	  The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address below.  The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right corner of this document.

                  Department of the Army Review Boards Agency
                  ATTN:  Promulgation Team
                  1941 Jefferson Davis Highway, 2nd Floor
                  Arlington, VA  22202-4508

3.  Minority views:  NONE  

PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION B - Verification and Authentication

Case report reviewed and verified	

MR. ADRIANCE                           
Case Reviewing Official	

PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

NONE

SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:

THOMAS J. ALLEN
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
   Review Board

Official:

SUZANNE WALKER    
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder

EXHIBITS:
A - Application for review of discharge              	C - Other 
B - Material submitted by applicant

INDEX RECORD:

AR Number:  1999025853                    INDEX NUMBERS:  A9217
Date of Review:  990602                                   A9235
Character of Service:  GD                                 A9445
Date of Discharge:  940104                                A0100
Authority:  AR 635-200 C14                                
Reason:  A6700                                            
Results of Board Action/                                  
Vote/Affirmation:  NC 5-0 A                               

PART IX - VOTING RECORD

    Name                                   Reason         Characterization
                                           CHANGE   NC    HON   UHC   NC   UNCHAR
    1. 	Mbr          X                  X       

    2. 	Mbr          X                  X       

    3. 	Mbr          X                  X       

    4. 	Mbr          X                  X       

    5. 	PO           X                  X