Application Receipt Date: 070405 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 and attached documents (30) submitted by the applicant. 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: 070301 Discharge Received: Date: 070308 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Company, 12th Combat Aviation Brigade Bldg 5850, Ketterbach Kaserne, Germany. 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: 850424 Current ENL Date: 020703 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 8 Mos, 7 Days ????? Total Service: 3 Yrs, 8 Mos, 7 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 25B10 Info System Operator Analyst GT: NIF EDU: NIF Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Afghanistan (050408-060217) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, AFGCMDL, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR (2), V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Orlando, FL 32808-0000 Current Address: 4634 LaVista Drive Orlando FL 32808 Post Service Accomplishments: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 21 February 2007, the applicant was charged with being absent from his unit from (070113-070114), without authority leaving his appointed place of duty and failing to go to his appointed place of duty (070112), missing the movement of HQ & HQ Company, 12th Combat Aviation Brigade, which he was required in the course of duty to move (070111), assaulting a SSG (070114) and disrespectful in language toward a SSG (070114), disobeying a lawful order from a Company 1SG (070112), disrespectful in language and deportment toward a CW2, (070109), disobeying a lawful order from a SGT (061220), did treat with contempt and was disrespectful in deportment toward a 1SG (061218), disobeying a lawful order from a SGT (061218) and was disrespectful in deportment toward a SGT (061218), and with intent to deceive, made an official statement, which as false to a SGT and a SSG (060920). On 27 February 2007, 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 1 March 2007, the Acting Staff Judge Advocate stated in his memorandum that the applicant's chain of command recommended approval of his request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 1 March 2007, 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. 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, documents and the issue he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit a partial upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The analyst does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The analyst found that the length of the applicant's service to include his combat service mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions. 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: 30 May 2008 Location: Washington, DC 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, and as a result it is inequitable. The Board determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, to include his combat service, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. 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. 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: NA XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 07 JULY 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070004912 Applicant Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages