Application Receipt Date: 2006/10/26 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The Applicant states that his discharge was based on a isolated incident that clearly happened as result of increased pressures caused by 911, he admits to no excuse. He feels that after serving his country since he was 17 years old he deserves an honorable discharge for his 22 total years of service. He states that he opted for the Chapter 10 because he did not want to risk going to jail and that his discharge was for marijuana and not for cocaine or meth. He states that his life is now ruined because of his under other than honorable conditions discharge for his one time mistake. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 020531 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Court Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: C/125th Forward Support Batallion, Fort Riley, KS 66442 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier's Overall Record DOB: Current ENL Date: 990516 Current ENL Term: NIF Years Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 00Mos, 16Days Total Service: 14 Yrs, 03Mos, 06Days Previous Discharges: RA 880225-911107/HD, RA 911108-941102/HD, RA 941103-970611/HD, RA 970612-990515/HD Highest Grade: E-6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 63B10/Light Vehicle Mechanic GT: 120 EDU: 2 years of college Overseas: Korea, Germany, Kuwait Combat: SWA (dates unknown) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM-6, ASUA, GCM-4, ARCAM, NDSM, SWA-3BSS 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 applicant's charge sheet (DD Form 458) is not part of the available record, and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. However, the evidence of record shows that on 7 May 2002, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense. Further, the applicant indicated that he understood that he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran's benefits. The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 7 May 2002, the applicant's trial Counsel, Captain/JA, indicated in a memorandum that he briefed the applicant's chain of command on the facts and circumstances of the pending court-martial, and they all recommended that the applicant's request for discharge in lieu of court-martial be approved with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 19 May 2002, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. On 29 May 2002, Orders 149-008, DA, Headquarters, 24th Infantry Division, Fort Riley, Kansas 66442, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date: 31 May 2002. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's available military records, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant's record is void of facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to a discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge 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: 19 December 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. 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 4 No change 1 - 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 characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's overall length and quality of his service to include his combat service and as a result it is inequitable. 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 proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails a restoration of grade to SSG/E-6. Case report reviewed and verified by: , 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: SSG/E-6 XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 21 December 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE