Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/03/23	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: 070829/denied 5/0  

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting documents 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: 020909
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 030207   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: D Co, 1/222th AV Reg, Ft Eustis, VA 

Time Lost: AWOL x 5 (010921-010928) 8 days, returned to duty 
                                     (011101-020117) 78 days, returned to military control 
                                     (020311-020322) 12 days, returned to duty 
                                     (020328-020402) 6 days, returned to duty 
                                     (020805-020903) 30 days, returned to duty for a total of 134 days lost.  

Military confinement for 25 days (020523-060616) as a result of a court-martial sentence.  Total time lost is 159 days.

The confinement period on the DD Form 214 is incorrect, should read (020523-020616) according to the inmate's release order.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 021004, AWOL (020805-020903); reduced to E1, forfeiture of $552 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG)

010620, failed to go to his appointed place of duty x3, (010523, 010524, 010604); 7 days restriction and 7 days extra duty  (Summ)

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 020514, AWOL x4 (010921-010928), (011101-020117), (020311-020322), (020328-020402) and failed to go to his appointed place of duty x2 (020304 & 020306); reduced to E3 and confined for 30 days (SCM).  

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  23
Current ENL Date: 991122    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 02Mos, 05Days extension at the convenience of the Govt
Total Service:  		5 Yrs, 09Mos, 19Days ?????
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: AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Acworth, GA
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant submits several character letters and one letter from his employer.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The 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, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct for being court-martialed for 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 Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  
       On 31 January 2003, the applicant again consulted with legal counsel, 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 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 under other than honorable conditions.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 of this regulation 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, and the issue and documents submitted with the application, 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 the former Soldier’s service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of 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 analyst noted that applicant's issue and found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the analyst determined that the applicant was incorrectly assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4”.  Therefore, the analyst recommends that the reentry eligibility code be administratively corrected to RE-3.  
       Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's reentry eligibility (RE) code, the analyst found that 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: 19 April 2010         Location: Atlanta, GA

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: None

VIII.  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 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
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090006963
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages