Application Receipt Date: 060427	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293, with attachments.

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: 010823
Discharge Received:     Date: 021113   
Chapter: 7    AR: 612-205
Reason: Resignation in Lieu of Honor Hearing
RE:     SPD: None
Unit/Location: Company A, Second Regiment Class of 2004, Cadet Detachment, U.S. Military Academy, West Point NY 10996 

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:  820219  
Current ENL Date: OAD USMA/000629    Current ENL Term: 8 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 8 Mos, 22 Days ?????
Total Service:  3 Yrs, 8 Mos, 22 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: USAR-990222-000628/NA
Highest Grade: E-3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: NIF   EDU: Some College   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant submitted a resume, transcripts of courses of study, and various military documents.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 23 August 2001, the unit commander recommended that the applicant be separated under the provisions of Chapter 7, AR 612-205, by reason of resignation in lieu of honor hearing (he was found on one honor violation and suspected of a second honor violation, overall performance was below average, and conduct was unsatisfactory), with an Honorable conditions discharge.  On 23 August 2001, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a resignation in Lieu of appearance before an Honor Investigative Hearing, Corps of Cadets, U.S. Military Academy.  He was advised of his rights.  The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an honorable conditions discharge.  The separation approval authority documentation directing the type of characterization of service to be issued to the appliant s not a part of the available records, and the analyst is presuming Government regularity in the discharge process.  His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 7a(1)b, Table 3, Rule 4, for resignation in lieu of honor hearing-with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows under Separation Code an authority for separation: Headquarters, USMA Orders #319-4, dated 15 November 2002.  On 15 November 2003, Orders 319-4, DA, HQ, US Corps of Cadets, West Point, NY 10996, discharged the applicant from the U.S. Corps of Cadets, USMA, and assigned him to ARPERCEN Control Group (IRR), St. Louis, MO 63132, effective date: 14 November 2002.  
      
      

      b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
      Army Regulation 612-205 set forth the basic authority for appointment and separation of Service Academy Attendees.  Chapter 7 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for reasons other than physical disability.  A member separated under this chapter will be processed under provisions of table 3.  
      

      c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, the issues and independent documents he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  The analyst found that the circumstances surrounding the applicant's discharge and his post service accomplishments, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  However, the reason for discharge remains both proper and equitable.  





























      

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 21 March 2007              
Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: N/A




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 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 determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge and his post service accomplishments, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  The Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it.  



















Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. John Zangas, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: None
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 23 March 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060006034

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 6 pages