Application Receipt Date: 06/08/31 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant feels that the discharge is based on an isolated incident in 5 years and 2 months of service with no other adverse action. The applicant states in effect he went AWOL 6 days prior to Hurricane Katrina hitting his disabled mother's home in Mississippi in order to assist her with the coming storm. He attempted to use the Chain of Command to obtain permission to leave but the Chain of Command did not get back to him so he went AWOL. He has provided financial aid to this mother and two siblings since joining the Army and has attempted to get them enrolled in DEERS. He is the defacto military sponsor for his immediate family. He now just wants to get a good job so he can take care of his family. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 060130 Discharge Received: Date: 060301 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (AWOL) RE: SPD: JKD Unit/Location: HHB, 1st Battalion, 17th Field Artillery, Fort Sill, OK 73501 Time Lost: The applicant has 16 Days of AWOL time, and was placed in CCA for 39 days. Total time lost is 55 days. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051108, Special Court Martial-for 2 x desertion/050822-050828 and 051003-051013, 4 X failure to repair, 6 Apr 05, 26 Apr 05, 16 Jun 05, 20 Jun 05, and failure to obey an order from the commander/ 050928 - 051002. He was sentenced to reduction to E-3 and 40 days confinement. Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 820805 Current ENL Date: 030103 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 11Mos, 3Days ????? Total Service: 05 Yrs, 04Mos, 09 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-000626-030102/NA Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92G10 ( Food Service Spec) GT: 84 EDU: GED Overseas: The applicant states he served in Germany; however, there is no supporting documentation to support his claim/SWA Combat: Iraq (030501-040701) Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, GWOTEM, ASR, C/A V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 30 January 2006 , 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/awol on two separate occasions, failure to repair x 4, and disobaying an order from the company commander), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with 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 of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 21 Februay 2006, 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, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge 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, documents and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The analyst noted the applicant's issues, and found that his discharge was not based on an isolated incident, rather on multiple misconducts and his declaration that he would not deploy to Iraq during time of war. Further, 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. 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 2007 Location: Washington DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change 2 No change 3 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - Reason (Board member names available upon request) IX. 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. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Ron Williams, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 20 October 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060012225 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 6 pages