Application Receipt Date: 060823	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293

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: 980316
Discharge Received:     Date: 980403   
Chapter: 13    AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance
RE:     SPD: JHJ
Unit/Location: 588th Maintenance Company, 19th Maintenance Battalion, Fort Sill, OK  73503 

Time Lost: AWOL, for a total of 6 days, from (960619-960624).  Also, the applicant was confined by the civilian authorities for 3 days from (951213-951215).

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 960719, Wrongfully appropriate a Jeep Cherokee, of a value more than $100.00, the property of a PFC (960407), unlawfully enter room 216a, Bldg 1603, with the intent to appropriate the keys to a Jeep Cherokee, the property of a PFC (960407), wrongfully and unlawfully make under oath, a false statement (960408), and AWOL, from (960619-960624), (Field Grade).  

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  760903  
Current ENL Date: 940720    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 8 Mos, 6 Days The net active service this period on the applicant's DD Form 214, item 12c is incorrect, the applicant has a period of AWOL, and civil confinement, that is not shown on the DD Form 214, item 29, time lost.  Net active service this period should be: 3 Years, 8 Months and 6 Days.  
Total Service:  3 Yrs, 8 Mos, 6 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 27M10 MLRS Repairer   GT: 99   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, 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:
      The evidence of record shows that on 11 March 1998, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l3, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance (while assigned to this unit, he failed to overcome a Bar to Reenlistment), with a general 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
      
      The applicant has an approved Bar to Reenlistment dated (970415), and a Military Police Report dated (960501) in his OMPF.  
      
      
      
      
      
      

      b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
      Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.  Army policy states that a general discharge, under honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate, but an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.

      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 recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his incidents of unsatisfactory performance.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  While the applicant's incidents of unsatisfactory performance are not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length of the applicant's service, and the time that has elapsed since his discharge mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable.  
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 29 August 2007              
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 2    No change 3   - Character
		 			      Change 0    No change 5   - 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: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 21 September 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060012039

Applicant Name:  Mr.       
______________________________________________________________________


Page 6 of 6 pages