Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 2008/08/01 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant 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? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 010213 Discharge Received: Date: 010515 Chapter: 4-2b AR: 635-200 Reason: Unacceptable Conduct RE: SPD: JNC Unit/Location: HHB, 214th Field Artillery Bde, Ft Sill, OK Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 010209, the suspended punishment from the first Article 15 is vacated as a result of new offenses, to wit: at or near Fort Sill, OK, on or about 2 December 2000, stole merchandise and or services of a value of about $43.20, the property of Holiday Bowl; on or about 2 December 2000, in a public place, to wit: Holiday Bowl, attempt to solicit a relationship with underage females, which conduct was unbecoming of an officer and gentleman; on or about 2 December 2000, knowingly fraternize with an enlisted Specialist, on terms of military equality, to wit: engaging in a relationship which would create an actual or clearly predictable adverse impact on discipline, authority, morale, or the ability of the command to accomplish its mission; forfeiture of $1300.00 pay per month for two months and restriction for 30 days. (FG) 001127, at Fort Sill, OK, on or about 18 October 2000, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: 0600 hrs Physical Training at building 2412; at Fort Sill, OK, on or about 19 October 2000, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: 1600 hrs Officer Professional Development at building 2412; forfeiture of $1000.00 pay per month for two months, with all forfeitures in excess of $500.00 per month for two months, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 1 June 2001. (FG) Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 21 Current ENL Date: 980815 Current ENL Term: Indef Years ????? Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 11Mos, 19Days ????? Total Service: 7 Yrs, 00Mos, 18Days ????? Previous Discharges: ADT 950524-950816/HD Highest Grade: 1LT Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 13A/ Field Artillery Officer GT: 110 EDU: COLLEGE GRAD, BS Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant cited several accomplishments since his discharge to include earning a Masters Degree in Psychology, licensed by the state of Arizona as an independent substance abuse counselor. He states that since August 2004 he has worked at the Arizona State Prison-Kingman where he serves as a clinical supervisor. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 15 February 2001, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 2(b)(5) and (8), AR 600-8-24, by reason of personal misconduct and conduct unbecoming an officer. The applicant was advised that he could submit a voluntary resignation in lieu of elimination or submit a rebuttal. The Ad Hoc Review Board recommended that the applicant’s elimination be accepted with issuance of a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 26 April 2001, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 600-8-24 sets forth the basic authority for Officer Transfers and Discharges. Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of the entire applicant’s military records, the issues, and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst determined that the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. 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 Army Officers. By his misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable or general 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. The analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined with the application and in the documents with the application. However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. In view of the foregoing the analyst determined that the characterization of service and reason for discharge were both proper and equitable, and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 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: 15 May 2009 Location: Washington, D.C. 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: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080012646 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages