Applicant Name:   

Application Receipt Date: 2008/07/30	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states: "When I requested a discharge in Lieu of Court Martial I did not know that meant a other than Honorable Discharge. While at Ft. Polk I was diagnosed with PTSD and now cannot get the proper care needed due to my discharge."

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: 061103
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 061117   Chapter: 10     AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: A Co, 115th Combat Support Hospital, 1st Combat Support Brigade (Manuver Enhancement) (Provisional), Fort Polk, LA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060523, at or near Fort Polk, LA, on or about 22 April 2006, at Control Point 1, physically controlled a vehicle, to wit: a passenger car, while the alcohol concentration in his breath was greater than the legal limit of 0.08; reduction to PFC (E-3), forfeiture of $800.00 pay per month for two months, suspended to be automatically remitted if not vacated on or by 23 November 2006, extra duty for 45 days, restriction for 45 days. (FG)

060609, suspension of punishment of forfeiture of $800.00 pay per month for two months was vacated for a new offense, at or near Fort Polk, LA, on or about 29 May 2006, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: extra duty formation.

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  22
Current ENL Date: 051219    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	0 Yrs, 10Mos, 29Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 03Mos, 14Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 041019-050721/HD
                                       RA 010201-010824/UNC (Physical conditions not a disability) 
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 68D10/Operating Room Specialist   GT: 97   EDU: HS GRAD   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM

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




VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 30 October 2006, the applicant was charged with from on or about 9 February 2006 until on or about 1 July 2006, wrongfully and without authority wore upon his uniform a Combat Infantryman Badge and the 101st Airborne Division Combat Patch; between 15 August 2006 and on or about 15 September 2006, wrongfully used MDMA, methylenedioxymethamphetamine, and MDA, methylenedioxyamphetamine; On or about 6 June 2006, with intent to deceive, make a false official statement to a CID Special Agent during the conduct of an official investigation.  On 1 November 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 submitted a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 8 November 2006, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  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, and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with the commission of offenses punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  The applicant consulted with defense counsel, and voluntarily in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated or lesser-included offenses under the UCMJ.  The analyst noted that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.  Furthermore, the record does not support the issue that the applicant suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 13 May 2009         Location: Washington, D.C.

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 0    No change 5
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: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080013162
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 3 pages