Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2009/05/01 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant. 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: 081116 Discharge Received: Date: 090209 Chapter: 14-12a AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) RE: SPD: JKN Unit/Location: A Btry, 3-29th FA Regt, APO AE 09378 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 081026, wrongfully appropriate an IPOD charger cable, of a value of about $100, the property of another Soldier (081006-081013), while receiving special duty pay under USC section 310, dereliction of duty x 3 (081011), (081011), (081012), and with intent to deceive, made a false official statement to a SSG (081011); reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $674 pay x 2 months (FG). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 27 Current ENL Date: 060103 Current ENL Term: 3 Years 16 Weeks Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 01Mos, 07Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 01Mos, 07Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 13B10 Cannon Crewmember GT: 88 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (060601-061031) and (071203-090131) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, NDSM, ICM-W/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, CAB V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Titusville, PA Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 26 October 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12a, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-minor infractions for receiving a Field Grade Article 15 (081026), for misbehavior of a sentinel while receiving special pay, wrongful appropriation, false official statement, and dereliction of duty on two different occasions with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant waived 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 service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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 applicant's record contains an Administrative Admonishment dated 1 October 2008, for dereliction of duty. 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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and document 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 noted the applicant's issue regarding being singled out because of his weight and 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. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends that the Board deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 16 February 2010 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA 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 XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090008174 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages