Case Number AR20070016100

Applicant Name:

Application Receipt Date: 2007/11/09	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents 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: 060109
Discharge Received:     Date: 060623   
Chapter:  10         AR: 635-200
Reason: In lieu of trial by court martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: 1st Bde Cbt Tm (Rear)(Provisional), 4th ID, Ft Hood, Tx 

Time Lost: AWOL for 164 days (051208-060522), apprehended; confinement 21 days, (060523-060613).  Total time lost 185 days.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None	

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None	

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  791219  
Current ENL Date: 040917    Current ENL Term:  NIF  Years  ?????
Current ENL Service:   01 Yrs,   09 Mos,   07  Days ?????
Total Service:  08   Yrs,   11 Mos,   24  Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 
RFAD  980706-980826  UNC
RA  990722-040916  HD
Highest Grade:   E5 
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 44B20  Metal Worker   GT: 118   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: Iraq (030403-040402)
Decorations/Awards:   ASR / NDSM / GWOTSM / GWOTE
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record:  
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant works as maintenance worker for Tysons Foods and provides support letters.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 9 January 2006, the applicant was charged with AWOL from 8 December 2005 until 22 May 2006.  On 8 June 2006 , 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.  The applicant's chain of command recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 14 June 2006, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request 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 issues 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 inequitable.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst noted 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 analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the reason for discharge remains both proper and equitable.     

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 15 February 2008              
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   2      No change   3     - 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. 





Case report reviewed and verified by: Edgar Yanger, 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: 18 February 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

       
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 5 pages