PART II - APPLICATION DATA (Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy) 1. Character of Discharge: General, Under Honorable Conditions 2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 980425 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: 3 Years(5 mos. ext.) ASR b. Entry date: 960320 (970814) OSR c. Age: 18 Years DOB: 770723 d. Educational level: HS Grad e. Aptitude area score: GT: 108 3. Highest grade achieved: f. Length of Service: E3 2 Year(s) 1 Month(s) 6 Day(s) 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) 971018 Derelict in the performance of your duties by negligently failing to properly clear your weapon (971002). 980318 Physically controlled a vehicle, while drunk (980131). 7. Court-Martial data: NONE a. SCM: Date Offense(s) b. SPCM: Date Offense(s) c. GCM: Date Offense(s) Remarks: The applicant has a Military Police Report in file dated (980305), and an Alcoholic Influence Report dated (981031). 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. Evidence of record shows that the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense, 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. 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. b. On 25 April 1998, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 2 years, 1 month, and 6 days of active military service in the period under review. 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 011213. 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 13 February 2002. 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 parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI, Paragraph 1, above. (1) The issue is rejected. The Board carefully examined the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review. There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses. The Board noted the applicant’s contentions, however, the Board found sufficient misconduct and substandard performance in his official record to warrant the separation action under review. The applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. The record shows that the applicant received two Article 15’s for dereliction of duty and driving while intoxicated, respectively. He was also counseled on numerous occasions for failing to repair, lying to noncommissioned officers, and breaking restriction. 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. Before initiating action to separate the applicant, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about the deficiencies that could lead to separation. The Board noted that the command made an assessment thereafter of the applicant's potential for becoming a fully satisfactory soldier, and the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service. The Board, being convinced that the reason for the discharge and characterization of service was both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. b. Equity: The applicant has not submitted an issue of equity and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an issue of equity to change the discharge. The major factors upon which the discharge was based are set forth in Parts III and IV of this decisional document. 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                            Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION SECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: GERARD W. SCHWARTZ Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: EARNEST C. SMITH, JR. 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: 2002066385 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217 Date of Review: 020213 A9235 Character of Service: GD A9405 Date of Discharge: 980425 A0100 Authority: AR 635-200 C14 Reason: A6730 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