Application Receipt Date: 061012	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See applicant's 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: 040819
Discharge Received:     Date: 040922   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: HHT, 2nd Squadron, 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment, Fort Polk, LA 71459 

Time Lost: AWOL-24 days from (040702-040725), applicant surrendered to the military police at Fort Polk, LA on (040725).  The applicant was placed in pre-trial confinement for 22 days from (040726-040818).  The applicant has another period of lost time from (040821-040824) on his DD Form 214, which cannot be determined after careful examination of the record.  The applicant had a total of 49 days lost time.          

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040628-Without authority, failed to go at the time prescribed to his place of duty x 4, (040616), (040610), (040608), and (040608), (Company Grade).  

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  790717  
Current ENL Date: 031029    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 09 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Total Service:  02  Yrs, 10 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-011003-031028/HD
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B10 Cannon Crewmember   GT: 104   EDU: GED Cert   Overseas: SouthWest Asia   Combat: Iraq (030426-040319)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, 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:
Evidence of record shows that on 19 August 2004, 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 (on 28 June 2004, he received a Company Grade Article 15 for numerous failures to be at his place of duty, immediately failed to report for extra duty.  After a brief return from AWOL, he went AWOL again for 25 days.  Additionally received numerous counseling statements for failure to report, drunk on duty, failure to obey a lawful order, and failure to follow orders), 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, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, 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 and senior commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 14 September 2004, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 

      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 issues 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; to include his combat service, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable.  This action entails a restoration of grade to PFC/E3.   

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 7 November 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 5    No change 0   - 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 does not condone applicant's misconduct; however, it determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service; to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  This action entails a restoration of grade to PFC/E3.  

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: PFC/E3

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

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

Official: 

CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 26 November 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060014474

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages