Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2011/12/05 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was based solely on an Article 15 for AWOL and not the issue why he was AWOL, and the discharge is improper because the documents he submitted were not recognized. He states that when he decided to go AWOL, he complied first with all the legal process to resolve his problem. He spoke with his chain of command regarding his problem. He even consulted the JAG office and asked for some advice. The chaplain, who counseled him and his wife, offered him to do an AR 635-200 (hardship?) and helping him in pushing his discharge to his chain of command, but with all the efforts and explanation, still the first sergeant denied his request. He was confused that day and did not know what would be next, so, he did not show up the following day and went AWOL. He states, his conscience is clear and God knows that he committed it to uphold a greater damage to his family relationship, especially to his children. He knows the Army is a champion with regards to helping the family of the Soldier. And he is proud to be a part of the institution. It’s been six months since he has been discharged. He is working as a Licensed Vocational Nurse in a home aged facility. He is doing well and participates in the church and is involved “in some charitable community as a member of FREE and ACEPTED MASON.” He still wants to extend his service to his fellow Soldiers, even through serving in the hospital or join the reserve unit. He states the Board is free to contact Chaplain K(S) or e-mail him. He heard that he is stationed in Ft Lewis, Washington. He pleads to please consider him for an upgrade, and hopes for the Board’s kindness and consideration. He concludes, “God bless you all.” 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: 110322 Discharge Received: Date: 110503 Chapter: 14-12c(1) AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (AWOL) RE: SPD: JKD Unit/Location: HHT, 2 Sqdn, 11th ACR, Fort Irwin, CA Time Lost: AWOL: (090805-110207) for 552 days (apprehended by civil authorities) Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 110302, AWOL (090805-110207), reduced to E-1; forfeiture of $733 x 2 months (suspended); 45-day extra duty and restriction, (FG) Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 37 Current ENL Date: 071024 Current ENL Term: 2 Years 23 Weeks Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 00 Mos, 07 Days ????? Total Service: 02 Yrs, 00 Mos, 07 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92Y (Unit Supply Spec) GT: 90 EDU: ????? Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM; NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states, in effect, that he is working as a Licensed Vocational Nurse in a home aged facility VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 16 March 2011, 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 being absent without leave (090805-110207), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 22 March 2011, the applicant waived consultation with a legal counsel and indicated he understood the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 19 April 2011, 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, and the issue and documents 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. The analyst noted that even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of the former Soldier’s 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. 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. Therefore, 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: 18 May 2012 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated 14 November 2011; Letter from Chaplain, dated 29 May 2009; Applicant's notarized letter, dated 26 June 2009; Applicant's spouse's notarized letter, dated 1 June 2009; Notarized letter from Mr. N, dated 2 June 2009; Notarized letter from Mr. M, dated 24 June 2009. 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: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA 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 AR20110024129 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages