Application Receipt Date: 070207

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: 041013

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: 020314
Discharge Received:     Date: 020430
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKD
Unit/Location: B Battery 1st Bn 5th FA Fort Riley KS 66442

Time Lost: AWOL-2 days (010206-010207), mode of retun to military control
NIF.  AWOL-7 days (010517-010523), mode of retun to military control NIF,
and again AWOL-17 days (010605-010622), surrendered to military authorities
at Keesler AFB, MS on (020622).  Applicant was AWOL a total of 26 days.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 010524-AWOL, (Summarized).  The
unit commanders mentions a Field Grade Article 15 in the recommendation
memo, however document NIF.

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  781108
Current ENL Date: 000215    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  The applicant was
placed on excess leave for a total of 287 days (010718-020430).
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 01 Mos, 20 Days      
Total Service:  02 Yrs, 01 Mos, 20 Days      
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E2
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No
MOS: 13B10 Cannon Crewmwmber   GT: 116   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None
Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR: Post Service Awards, AFSM, HSM (2), SADR, LESM
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: Rockton, IL
Current Address: 12000 Primrose Place (Unit C)
Poplar Grove IL 61065
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant enlisted in the State of
Illinois Army National Guard.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 11 July 2001, the unit commander
notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the
provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of
a serious offense (awol from on or about 6 February 2001 to on or about 8
February 2001, from on or about 17 May 2001 to on or about 24 May 2001, and
from on or about 5 June 2001 to on or about 22 June 2001,  he was dropped
from the rolls of the Army as a deserter.  In the commanders opinion his
retention would have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order
and morale), 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 commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and
recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than
honorable conditions discharge.  On 10 April 2002, 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 subsequently heard by the Army Discharge Review
Board on (041013), and his characterization of service was upgraded to
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 l4 establishes policy and
prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific
categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct,
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 found no mitigating factors that would merit an
upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The applicant’s discharge was
appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the
Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by
military personnel.  By his misconduct, the applicant diminished the
quality of his 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.  Therefore, the
reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both
proper and equitable.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing:                  Date: 16 April 2007
Location: Chicago, IL

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No

Counsel: No

Witnesses/Observers: No

Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted 12 pages of additional
documents in support of his personal appearance hearing.



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     No change    (Character)
                                        Change     No change    (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, hearing his testimony, and considering
the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the
characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now
inequitable. The Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct;
however, found that the circumstances surrounding the discharge and his
post service accomplishments mitigated the discrediting entries in his
service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form
of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.
However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper
and equitable and voted not to change it.
















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:


MARY E. SHAW                      DATE: 8 May 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder