Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 071025	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 050810
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 050829   Chapter: 14       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 59th QM Co, 68th CSB (Rear), Fort Carson, CO 

Time Lost: AWOL X 2 for 27 days (050328 to 050329, and 050610-050707), mode of return unknown.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050418, Failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (050211) and AWOL (050328 to 050329), reduct to E-3 (suspended), forfeiture of $361.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), 7 days extra duty (suspended), and 14 days restriction (suspended), (CG).

050518, suspension of punishment of reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $361.00 pay per month for two months,7 days extra duty, and 14 days restriction was vacated for disorderly conduct (050424).

050719, AWOL (050610-050707), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $773.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), 45 days extra duty, 45 days restriction, (FG).

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  20
Current ENL Date: 041129    Current ENL Term: 04 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 08Mos, 02Days Includes two period of AWOL (050328, and 050610-050706)
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 08Mos, 11Days The applicant's DD Form 214 under review incorrectly show the applicant Date Entered AD This Period" as; year 2002, month 12, and day 17, should read as; year 2002, month 11, and day 20, as found on the applicant's enlistment contract.
Previous Discharges: 	RA-021120-041128/HD
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92Y10/Unit Supply Specialist   GT: 114   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, KDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Syracuse, NY
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       Evidence of record shows that on 10 August 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (050211); and AWOL X 2 (050328 to 050329 and 050610 to 050707), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant waived 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.  On 10 August 2005, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of 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 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, however, a general 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, documents, and the issue 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.  Furthermore, the anlyst noted the applicant's issue, the evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.  Additionally, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 26 September 2008         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

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, and voted to deny relief.




        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
								         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 									 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070015153
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages