Application Receipt Date: 060608 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents. 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 050803 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu Of Trial By Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: B Company 3rd Bn 505th PIR Fort Bragg, NC 28310 Time Lost: AWOL-317 days (040715-050531), surrendered to military authorities at Fort Bragg, NC on (050601) and transferred to Fort Knox, KY. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050610-AWOL, (040715-050531), (Company Grade). Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 840609 Current ENL Date: 021016 Current ENL Term: 4 Years item 12a on DD Form 214, date entered active duty this period is incorrect, should read (021016). Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 07Mos, 00Days ????? Total Service: 02 Yrs, 07 Mos, 6 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-011010-021015/NA Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11B1P GT: 126 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (030804-040320) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, CIB, C/Ach, C/App V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states he volunteered for 90 hours at a local hospital. He further states he has a 4.0 grade point average with a double major in chemistry and biochemistry, contributed to an academic journal at the University of Minnesota earing a full academic scholarship, and serves as a member on the University's social concerns committee. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 6 July 2005, the applicant was charged with AWOL from (040715-050531). On 23 June 2005, the 82nd Airborne Division Psychiatrist, diagnosed the applicant with disorders of Axis I: 300.00, an anxiety disorder, not otherwise specified, 296.90, a mood disorder, not otherwise specified, and recommmended that he discharged from the Army with a general, under honorable conditions characetrization of service. On 26 June 2005, 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 would receive a general, under honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have some effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits. The applicant submitted a statement in his own behalf. The applicant's chain of command recommended disapproval of the request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The separation authority disapproved the request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. On 24 July 2005, again 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. The applicant's chain of command recommended approval of the request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 26 July 2005, the separation authority approved the discharge and directed that the applicant be separated from the Army with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 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 military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions. 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 now inequitable. While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, the medical circumstances surrounding the discharge and his post service accomplishments mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. However, the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. This action entails a restoration of grade to SPC/E4. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 2 July 2007 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: No Witnesses/Observers: No Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted nine additional documents in support of his personal appearance hearing. 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 No change (Character) Change No change (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, hearing his testimony, and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. The Board does not condone the applicant's misconduct; however, found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, the medical circumstances surrounding the discharge, and his post service accomplishments, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails a restoration of grade to SPC/E4. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, 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: SPC/E4 XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 11 July 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060008552 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages