Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 2008/04/04 Prior Review: No Prior Review Date: I. Applicant Request: Change to General and Change Reason for Separation REASON: No REASON CHANGE: No RE CODE CHANGE: No Issues: 105.0200 Mental Incompetency/Capacity II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? No Tender Offer: sdfsd See Attachments: Legal: No Medical: No Minority Opinion: No Exhibits: No III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Dishonorable Discharge Cert Date: Not In File Discharge Received: Not Applicable Date: Not In File Chapter: 32r32 Regulation: AR 135-178 Reason: frewrew RE: RE-2 SPD: r23 Unit/Location: 32r32 / 23r32r Time Lost: Article 15s and Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): Offense: efewew Offense Date: 2004/04/04 Punishment: ewrwe Counseling Records Available: No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 18 Current ENL Date: 1995/04/04 Current ENL Term: 23 Years Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 3 Mos, 3 Days Total Service: 3 Yrs, 31 Mos, 2 Days Previous Discharges: Highest Grade: YD-03 - Civilian - NSPS YD-03 Performance Ratings Available: Not In File MOS: 1212 GT: Not In File EDU: Not In File Overseas/Combat Record: Decorations/Awards: V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: mclean,VA 22102 Post Service Accomplishments: dsffe VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The Board carefully examined the available records for the period of enlistment under review. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. That DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12c(1) by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense-AWOL, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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. Barring evidence to the contrary, the Board was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of this Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The analyst, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. b. Legal Basis for Separation: 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. Retention is normally only considered in exceptionally meritorious cases when clearly in the best interests of the Army. Because of the civilian conviction, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable (or general discharge). (The Board noted that an Administrative Separation Board was properly conducted and that the separation authority determined the specific offenses warranted separation.) The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his (her) service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: 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. Retention is normally only considered in exceptionally meritorious cases when clearly in the best interests of the Army. Because of the civilian conviction, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable (or general discharge). (The Board noted that an Administrative Separation Board was properly conducted and that the separation authority determined the specific offenses warranted separation.) The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his (her) service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: ADRB Date: 2010/01/01 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes Did the Applicant Appear? No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA 2 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. The Board noted that the applicant was enrolled in the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) and was aware of the consequences of any action which would demonstrate any inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program. As a result of the applicant's actions and after consultation with the drug and alcohol abuse counselor, the command declared the soldier a rehabilitation failure. The evidence of record establishes the fact that the applicant was properly counseled and afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome his problems. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. IX. Board Decision Board Vote: Character – 1 Change 0 No Change Reason - 0 Change 1 No Change (Board member names available upon request) XI. Certification Signature Approval Authority: EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board X. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Yes Change Characterization to: General Discharge Change Reason to: No Change Other: wfew RE Code: RE-3 Grade Restoration: No Grade: ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090013506 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3