Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/11/14	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that this was his first offense and they changed his ruling two weeks before he got out of the Army.  He was aware of what he did and it was due to problems involving the safety of his son.  He was AWOL and returned with another Soldier on there own and they both had some charges but the other Soldier got a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 

He knows that his unit tried and did make an example of him and a lot of shady stuff happened due to his rear detachment chain of command.  He feels that the one thing he did should not have resulted in under other than honorable conditions discharge, which cut off his benefits as well.  He feels that there should be some type of monetary compensation for his right knee, which can't go back to being normal according to the doctors and he is limited on certain jobs because of this.   

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: 100806
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 101012   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: ????? 

Time Lost: AWOL x 2; (100322-100415) for 24 days, the applicant returned to his unit; AWOL (100416-100630) for 75 days, the applicant returned to his unit.  Total time lost was 99 days.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 100812, AWOL (100416-100630), (the DA Form 2627 continuation sheet is not in the available record); reduction to SPC (E-4), forfeiture of $1,146.90 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:  21
Current ENL Date: Reenl/061027    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 8  Mos, 7  Days ?????
Total Service:  		7 Yrs, 1  Mos, 17  Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ARNGUS 030107-031126/UNC
                                       USAR 031219-040405/NA
                                       RA      040406-061026/HD
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92A10 Automated Logistical Spec   GT: 99   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (050906-060830), Afghanistan (071226-081230)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM (2), GCMDL, NDSM, ACMDLw/2 CSS, GWOTSM, NATOMDL, ICMDLw/CS, NCOPDR, JMUA, ASR, OSR (2), CAB



V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 6 August 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense; in that he went AWOL from (100322-100415), at which time he also missed the movement with his unit to Afghanistan, and again he went AWOL from (100416-100630) and tested positive for marijuana (100630).  The unit commander recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 9 August 2010, the intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 
       
       On 26 August 2010, the senior intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 26 August 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant again that he was initiating the separation action action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense; in that he went AWOL from (100322-100415), at which time he also missed the movement with his unit to Afghanistan, and again he went AWOL from (100416-100630) and tested positive for marijuana (100630) with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 
       
       On 27 August 2010, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification memorandum informing him that the unit commander was recommending him for an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 30 August 2010, applicant waived legal counsel and his right to have his case heard by an administrative separation board; was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  On 21 September 2010, 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, the issue and document submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The analyst determined that 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 the 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.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue that this was his first offense and they changed his ruling two weeks before he got out of the Army.  He was aware of what he did and it was due to problems involving the safety of his son.  While the applicant may believe his problems at home was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief for his problems through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other resources available to all Soldiers.  Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct.  Further, the analyst 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.  
       
       The applicant contends that he was AWOL and returned with another Soldier on their own and they both had some charges but the other Soldier got a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The method in which another Soldier’s case was handled is not relevant to the applicant’s case.  Applicable regulations state that each case must be decided on an individual basis considering the unique facts and circumstances of that particular case. 
       
       The applicant further contends that he feels the one thing he did should not have resulted in an under other than honorable conditions discharge which cut off his benefits as well; he feels that there should be some type of monetary compensation for his right knee, which can't go back to being normal according to the doctors and he is limited on certain jobs because of this.  The correction the applicant requests does not fall within the purview of this Board.  The applicant submitted a DD Form 149 and the applicant's case will be transferred to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) regarding the aforementioned issue.  Further, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       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: 1 June 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 19 October 2011, DD Form 149 dated 18 October 2011.















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						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: 
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: No Change
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder















Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20110022636
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages