Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/27 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? Yes Tender Offer: N/A See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 070319 Discharge Received: Date: 070530 Chapter: 14-12b AR: 635-200 Reason: Patterns of Misconduct RE: SPD: JKA Unit/Location: B Co, 425th BSTB, 4th BCT, FOB Kalsu, Iraq Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 061210, disobeying a direct order from a noncommissioned officer x2; reduction to E2, forfeiture of $333.00 for one month, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 10 January 2007, extra duty for 14 days, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 7 January 2007 (CG). 061212, vacation of suspension for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. 070205, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x13 (061114, 061117, 061125, 061204, 061205, 061206, 061207, 061209, 061212, 061213, 061214, 061219, 061223, disobeying a direct order from a noncommissioned officer X3 (061130, 061206, 061214); forfeiture of $700.00 a month for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 24 Current ENL Date: 050520 Current ENL Term: 5 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 0Mos, 11Days ????? Total Service: 2 Yrs, 0Mos, 11Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 97E10 Humint Collector GT: 112 EDU: GED Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (060927-070512) Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, OSR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Post Service Accomplishments: None provided by the applicant. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 19 March 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for receiving a Company Grade Article 15 for disobeying a direct order from a noncommissioned officer x2, vacation of suspension for failing to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty, Field Grade Article 15 for failing to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty x13, disobeying a direct order from a noncommissioned officer X2, 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 submitted a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army 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. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 of this regulation 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 and documents submitted with the application, 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 the former Soldier’s service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of 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. The record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.” If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact the local recruiter to determine 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 if appropriate. 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: 17 February 2010 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: N/A Witnesses/Observers: N/A Exhibits Submitted: N/A 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 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: ????? ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090007090 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 pages