Application Receipt Date: 060130 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he would like to get back into the Army and serve his country. 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: 050418 Discharge Received: Date: 050512 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKA Unit/Location: A Company, 3rd Psychological Operations Battalion (Airborne) (Dissemination), Fort Bragg, NC 28310 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 041202, failed to go to his appointed place of duty (040917); with intent to deceive, made an official statement to a SSG, which was false (041122) and violating a lawful general regulation, by wrongfully wearing an earring while in duty uniform (041122); (Company Grade) 2nd Article 15, 050112, failed to go to his appointed place of duty (041230) and willfully disobey a lawful order from a SSG (041230); (Company Grade) 3rd Article 15, 050330, larceny, of a value of about $40.00, the property of AAFES (050319); (Company Grade) 4th Article 15, 050405, broke restriction on or about (050330); (Company Grade) Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 841028 Current ENL Date: 040205 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 3 Mos, 8 Days ????? Total Service: 1 Yrs, 3 Mos, 8 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 21L10 Lithographer GT: 94 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR 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 11 April 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct (violated restriction for which he received a Company Grade Article 15, stole a gameboy advance and a gameboy advance game, for which he received a Company Grade Article 15, failed to go to his appointed place of duty and failed to obey a lawful order from a non-commissioned officer, for which he received a Company Grade Article 15, failed to be at his appointed place of duty, made a false official statement, violated a lawful general regulation, by wearing an earring while in duty uniform, for which he received a Company Grade Article 15) with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with 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. On 20 April 2005, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The applicant has a Military Police Report of dated (050319) in his OMPF 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, 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. Furthermore, if the applicant desires to reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his eligibility to reenlist. Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 29 November 2006 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: N/A Witnesses/Observers: N/A Exhibits Submitted: N/A 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 No change (Character) Change No change (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, voted to deny relief. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Ron Williams, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: None RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 1 December 2006 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060001780 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages