Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/10	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

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: 051201
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 051220   Chapter: 14-12c(1)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (AWOL)	   RE:     SPD: JKD   Unit/Location: F Co, 94th BSB,  Ft Polk, LA 

Time Lost: AWOL x2; (050603-050621) 18 days, mode of return unknown; and (050713-050909) 59 days (surrendered) for a total of 77 days.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050930, AWOL (050603-050621 & 050713-050909); reduction to E1, forfeiture of $617 pay per month for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 040707    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  20 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	1 Yrs, 02Mos, 28Days ?????
Total Service:  		1 Yrs, 02Mos, 28Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92G10 Food Services Operations   GT: 104   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR, GWOTSM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Mesa, AZ
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states that she has "gone to school and graduated and is a Massage Therapist".  There is a certificate of completion submitted by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 1 December 2005, 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 for going AWOL (050603-050621 & 050613-050909), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of her case by an Administrative Separation Board contingent upon her receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions and did not submit a statement in her 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The separation authority approved the conditional waiver request, 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 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 the applicant’s issue and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.  
       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.  The analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined with the application and in the documents with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. 
       Therefore, the analyst determined 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: 15 January 2010         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
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 AR20090007764
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages