Application Receipt Date: 061102 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the Applicant II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 060424 Discharge Received: Date: 060504 Chapter: 14-12C AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct, (Serious Offense) RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: 10th Combat Aviation Brigade (Rear) (Provisional) 10th Mountain Divisioni (Light Infantry) Fort Drum, NY Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050520, wrongfully driving on post while his on-post driving privileges were suspended (050505). (Block 6 of DA Form 2627 not in file) (FG) Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier's Overall Record DOB: Current ENL Term: 06 Years Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 04Mos, 20Days Total Service: 14 Yrs, 00Mos, 07Days Previous Discharges: RA 920428-941016/HD RA 941017-970427/HD RA 970428-990505/HD RA 990506-001214/HD Highest Grade: E-6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 15P20/Aviation Ops Sp GT: 111 EDU: 13 yrs Overseas: Afghanistan, Hawaii, Panama Combat: Afghanistan (030717-040330) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, JSAM, AAM-2, AGCM-3, NDSM-2, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, EIB V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None listed. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 24 March 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-on 20 March 2005, he was apprehended for driving while intoxicated; on 4 April 2005 (it appears the commander used an incorrect date; the correect date is 5 May 2005), he was apprehended for driving on a suspended license; on 17 December 2005, he was apprehended for driving while intoxicated; and on 10 March 2006, he was again apprehended for driving while intoxicated and driving on a suspended license, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 30 March 2006, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and conditionally waived his right to appear before an administrative separation board contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no worse than general, under honorable conditions. He submited a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. On 19 April 2006, 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 General Officer Memoradum of Reprimand dated 30 March 2005. The record also contains four MP reports dated 20 March 2005, 5 May 2005, 17 December 2005, and 10 March 2006. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 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 leaveAction 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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's military records, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 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. 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: 071219 Location: Washington DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change 2 No change 3 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - Reason (Board member names available upon request) IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation Case report reviewed and verified by: , Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: Other: RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE