Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/03/26	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant submitted no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board. 

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: 061210
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070112   Chapter: 14-12c(1)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (AWOL)	   RE:     SPD: JKD   Unit/Location: I Co, 262nd QM Bn, Fort Lee, VA 

Time Lost: AWOL x 2 for a total of 11 days; (060616-060622) for 7 days, mode of return unknown; (060714-060717) for 4 days, surrendered. 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): The unit commander's recommendation memorandum indicates the applicant received an Article 15; however, it is not contained in the available record.  

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  31
Current ENL Date: 060208    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  20 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 	00  Yrs, 10  Mos, 24  Days ?????
Total Service:  		04  Yrs, 10  Mos, 27  Days includes 134 days of excess leave (060901-070112)
Previous Discharges: 	USN-020130-020204/NA
                                       USN-020205-051212/NA
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 94   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: service dates are not in the file    Combat: service dates are not in the file
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NGCM, SSDR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 27 July 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(1), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense for absenting himself from his unit (AWOL) x 2  (060616-060623), (060714-060718) and he was dropped from the rolls of the Army as a deserter, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.
       
       On 27 July 2006, 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 submitted a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The senior intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 11 December 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge 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 during the period of enlistment under review and the  the application he submitted, 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. 
       
       Although the applicant did not properly annotate the DD Form 293 requesting a review of his record for a possible upgrade of his discharge; he was given the benefit of this review as instructed in pertinent part (E.3.1.3.2) by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge.
       
       The applicant submitted no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board.
       
       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: 22 August 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated (120309).








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 characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board determined that the length of the applicant's service and the nature of the offenses, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  

IX.  Board Decision						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 5    No change 0
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: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




ARCHIE L. DAVIS III
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 AR20120006489
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 3 of 3 pages