Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/05/22	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 020419
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 020502   Chapter: 10      AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: D Trp, 6-6th CAV, APO AE 09140 

Time Lost: None

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

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  31
Current ENL Date: 010829    Current ENL Term: NIF Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 08Mos, 04Days ?????
Total Service:  		12 Yrs, 07Mos, 27Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-890906-941218/HD
                                       RA-941219-980325/HD
                                       RA-980326-010828/HD
Highest Grade: E-6		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 68B30 Aircraft Powerplant Repairer   GT: 107   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia/Korea/Germany/Albania   Combat: Saudi Arabia (900923-910419-Prior Service)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM-4, AGCM-3, NDSM, SWASM-3 BSS, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-2, NM, KLM-SA, KLM-Kuwait

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Mckenzie, AL
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 15 March 2002, the applicant was charged with wrongfully committing an indecent sexual act with a female Ms. JS by engaging in sexual acts with her while another was present (010127) and wrongfully have sexual intercourse with a female Ms. JS, a woman not his wife (010127).  On 17 April 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.  The unit commander recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  The intermediate and senior intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 23 April 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. 
       
       The applicant's record contains a CID Laboratory Report dated 5 December 2001, with additional exhibits dated 30 and 9 November 2001.  

       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 and the issues he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would warrant a partial upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  While, the analyst does not condone the applicant’s misconduct, there was a full consideration of all service including the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The analyst found that 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 partial relief be granted in the form of an upgrade of the  characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  This action entails a restoration of grade to SSG/E-6.
       
       Furthermore, by his misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  Further, the analyst noted the applicant's issue submitted with his application.  However, the issue does not provide the Board a basis upon which to grant relief.  Therefore, 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: 6 March 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

VIII.  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.  





        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 2    No change 3
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080008376
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages