Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2007/07/31 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 990512 Chapter: 14-12c AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: B Co, 82d EN Bn, APO, AE Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 990105, disrespect to noncommissioned officer x 2 (981112), reduced to E3, forfeiture of $287.00, 14 days restriction and 14 days extra duty. (CG). Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 990305, SCM, Disobeyed order from Officer, disobeyed order from NCO, assault, and communicate a threat; 21 days confinement. Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Year/Month: 7312 HOR City, State: Mill Creek, PA Current ENL Date: 970213 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 02 Mos, 00 Days ????? Total Service: 04 Yrs, 10 Mos, 12 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA 940701-970212 HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 12B10 Combat Engineer GT: 103 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM / ASR / NDSM / GCMDL / OSR / JMUA V. Post-Discharge Activity Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 29 March 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for failing to pay debts, failing to report to appointed place of duty, disrespecting and disobeying non-commissioned officers, missing guard mount, charged with assault on two separate occasions, and convicted under a Summary Court-Martial for assault, disobeying orders from a Non-Commissioned and Commissioned officer, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived his right to an Administrative Separation Board, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 5 May 1999, the separation authority approved the unconditional waiver to an Administrative Separation Board, waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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 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 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. Furthermore, 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 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: 23 July 2008 Location: Washington D.C. 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 0 No change 5 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - Reason (Board member names available upon request) IX. 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. X. Board Action Directed No Change 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 and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 25 July 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070010683 ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 4 pages