Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 071015 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: 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: 070307 Discharge Received: Date: 070328 Chapter: 14-12b AR: 635-200 Reason: Pattern of Misconduct RE: SPD: JKA Unit/Location: Hqs and Hqs Battery, 3rd BN, 320th Field Artillery Regiment, Fort Campbell, KY Time Lost: AWOL X 2 (061108-061210) for 32 days - surrendered, and (070206-070211) for 6 days- mode of return unknown. Total lost time 38 days. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070122, AWOL (061108-061210). (FG) Commander's Memorandum dated 7 March 07 indicates the solider's punishment imposed was reduction to E3, forfeiture of $846 x2 (suspended), 45 days extra duty and 45 days restriction; however the punishment was not listed on the Article 15, DA Form 2627. Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 22 Current ENL Date: 041223 Current ENL Term: 5 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 02Mos, 18Days ????? Total Service: 05 Yrs, 00Mos, 25Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA 020125-041201/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 13B10/Cannon Crewman GT: 107 EDU: GED Overseas: Kosovo and Southwest Asia Combat: Kosovo (020712-021111); Kuwait/Iraq x 2 (040212-050211) and (050918-060901). Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM,GWOTEM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KCM, ICM, ASR, OSR x2, NATO Medal, CAB V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Duncanville, Alabama Post Service Accomplishments: None LIsted VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 7 March 2007 , the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for pattern of failing to report to your appointed place of duty on time on multiple occasions, have had a serious lack of motivation, difficulty following orders and have even gone AWOL twice, 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. 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, 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 independent evidence he submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service and his three tours served in a combat zone (Kosovo and Kuwait/Iraq x 2) mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 18 September 2008 Location: Washington DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA 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 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 2 No change 3 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Issue a new DD Form 214 Colonel, U.S. Army Change Characterization to: President, Army Discharge Review Board Change Reason to: Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: ????? ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070014300 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 2 pages