PART II - APPLICATION DATA (Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy) 1. Character of Discharge: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 020429 3. Authority for separation: a. Regulation: Chapter 14, AR 635-200 b. Reason: Misconduct 4. Prior review(s): NONE PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review 1. Service data: 2. Awards and decorations: ASR a. Period entered for: 3 Years b. Entry date: 010103 c. Age: 17 Years DOB: 830313 d. Educational level: HS Grad e. Aptitude area score: GT: 103 3. Highest grade achieved: f. Length of Service: E3 0 Year(s) 10 Month(s) 29 Day(s) 4. Performance evaluations: NONE PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued 5. Periods of unauthorized absence: Status Inclusive dates AWOL 010717-010919; 011219-020107; 020204-020204; Mil conf 0 Civil conf 0 Other 0 6. Nonjudicial punishment: Date Offense(s) 011017 AWOL (010717-010919). 020128 Failure to report (020128)(summarized). 7. Court-Martial data: NONE a. SCM: Date Offense(s) b. SPCM: Date Offense(s) c. GCM: Date Offense(s) 8. Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data NONE Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. Evidence of record shows that the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-pattern of misconduct, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived a hearing by a board of officers, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service. The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 23 April 2002, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. b. On 29 April 2002, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 10 months, and 29 days of active military service and accrued 86 days of lost time in the period under review. 2. Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter l4 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, 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, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS 1. Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel. As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293. 2. Exhibit(s) submitted: A-1: DD Form 293, dated 020812. A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED) SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor ( ) Legal Advisor a. Medical prehearing comments (if applicable): b. Legal prehearing comments (if applicable): PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits 1. Review/hearing information: a. Type requested: ( X ) Records review ( ) Hearing b. Type Held: ( X )Records review ( ) Hearing ( ) Tender Offer c. Review/hearing location and date: Washington, DC on 20 November 2002. d. Appearance by: Applicant ( ) Yes ( X ) No Counsel ( ) Yes ( X ) No e. Applicant testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No f. Counsel presentation: ( ) Yes ( X ) No g. Witness(es) testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No 2. Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing: PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS 1. a. Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity: ( X ) Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A of this case report and directive. ( ) Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as follows: ( ) Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as follows: b. Request: ( X ) Recharacterization ( ) Change of Reason 2. Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on issues of propriety and/or equity: a. Propriety: The applicant has not submitted an issue of propriety and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an issue of propriety to change the discharge. b. Equity: The parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI, Paragraph 1, above. (1) The issue is rejected. The Board carefully examined the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review. There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses. The Board noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the Board does not upgrade discharges merely to gain access to veteran’s benefits. The applicant’s record contained sufficient misconduct and substandard performance to warrant the separation action under review. 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 record shows that the applicant received an Article 15 for an extended period of AWOL and a summarized Article 15 for failing to repair. In addition, the applicant had two other periods of AWOL and used amphetamines, an illegal drug. 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 evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of nonjudicial punishment. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts. Finally, the Board noted that the applicant waived his right to an administrative separation board and did not avail himself of the opportunity to submit issues of mitigation at the time of his discharge. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. 3. Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s): NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote 1. Board conclusion(s): The discharge was: ( X ) Proper. ( ) Improper as to characterization. Change characterization to                                     . ( ) Improper as to reason. Change reason to                         under                      . ( X ) Equitable. ( ) Inequitable as to characterization. Change characterization to                               . ( ) Inequitable as to reason. Change reason to                        under                                 . ( ) Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should be changed to                      under                         . 2. Voting record: Change No Change Reason 0 5 Characterization 0 5 The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address below. The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right corner of this document. Department of the Army Review Boards Agency ATTN: Promulgation Team 1941 Jefferson Davis Highway, 2nd Floor Arlington, VA 22202-4508 3. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified                            Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION SECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: SPURGEON A. MOORE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: JOHN F. LONG Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant INDEX RECORD: AR Number: 2002077559 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217 Date of Review: 021120 A9231 Character of Service: UD A9321 Date of Discharge: 020429 A0100 Authority: AR 635-200 C14 Reason: A6750 Results of Board Action/ Vote/Affirmation: NC 5-0 A PART IX - VOTING RECORD Name  Reason Characterization CHANGE NC HON UHC NC UNCHAR 1. Mbr      X          X     2. Mbr      X          X     3. Mbr      X          X     4. Mbr      X          X     5. Mbr      X          X