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 and attached documents.

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: 020909
Discharge Received:     Date: 030207   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: D Company, 1st Battalion, 222nd Aviation Regiment, Fort Eustis, VA 23604 

Time Lost: AWOL-131 days, 8 days, from (010921-010928), applicant returned duty on (010928), 77 days from, (011101-020117), returned to military control on (020117), 12 days, from (020311-020322), returned to duty on (020322), 5 days, from (020328-020402), returned to duty on (020402), and 29 days, from (020805-020903), returned to duty on (020903).  The applicant was confined by military authority for 24 days, from (020523-020616), as a result of his court-martial sentence.  The applicant had a total of 155 days lost time.

The confinement period on the DD Form 214 is incorrect, it reads (020523-020606), should read (020523-020616), see inmates' release order.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 021004-AWOL from (020805-020903), (Field Grade).

010620-Without authority, failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 3, (010523),  (010524), and (010604), (Summarized ).

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 020523-Summary Court-Martial/AWOL- from, (010921-010928), (011101-020117), (020311-020322), (020328-020402), and failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 2, (020304), and (020606). The applicant was reduced to the grade of PFC/E3, and to be confined for 30 days. 

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  760325  
Current ENL Date: 991122    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 03  Yrs, 02 Mos, 15 Days ?????
Total Service:  05 Yrs, 09 Mos, 19 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-961120-991121/HD
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31R10 Multichannel Transmission System Operator   GT: 122   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AGCM, NDSM, ASR, OSR, ACFT CRWMAN BDGE
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 9 September 2002, 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 (court-martialed for for being AWOL four times and failure to report twice), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, and submitted a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  On 31 January 2003, the applicant again consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily, and unconditionally waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.    The intermediate and senior commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 31 January 2003, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of an under other than honorable conditions. 
      
      The applicant's service was extended beyond his ETS at the request and for the convenience of the Government.   
      

      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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length of the applicant's service; the circumstances surrounding his discharge, and two supporting statements attesting to  events prior and subsequent to his AWOL that led to 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: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




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 0    No change 5   - 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, and voted to deny relief.














  






Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: NA
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

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

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 20 September 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060012065

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 6 of 6 pages