Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/10/27	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: 070228/Records Review     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states "This discharge was based on one incident within years of honorable dedicated service.  I have become a more focused and mature person.  I do volunteer work at the VA clinic in anchorage.  I have also worked at the central issue facility on ft. Richardson helping Soldiers by making sure they get the gear they need to complete their missions.  I have also enrolled in college at UAA to earn a degree in the medical field to continue helping people."

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: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 040610   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: A Battery 49th Space Bn (GMD) Fort Greely, AK 

Time Lost: AWOL-57 days (040414-040610), mode of return unknown

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:  28
Current ENL Date: OAD/031001    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 06Mos, 12Days ?????
Total Service:  		15 Yrs, 06Mos, 10Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USAR-881004-890123/NA
                                       RA-890124-920415/HD
                                       USARCG-920416-920715/NA
                                       ARNG-920716-940121/GD
                                       USARCG-940122-961125/NA
                                       ARNG-961126-991125/HD 
                                       ARNG-020301-030930/NA
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31E10 Field Radio Repairman/35E10 Radio/Commo Security Repairman   GT: 122   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (901104-910615)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM -2, AGCM, NDSM-2, SWASM (w/3 BSS), ASR, KLM-SA, KLM-K

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Eagle River, AK
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed



VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicant’s release from the Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) Program are not contained in the available records.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which the applicant was unavailable for signature.  His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS (i.e., in lieu of trial by court-martial), with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3."  Evidence of record shows that on 10 June 2004, Departments of The Army And Air Force, Joint Forces Headquarters-Alaska, Human Resources Office, Fort  Richardson, AK, Orders 162-006 released the applicant from the Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) Program, effective date:  10 June 2004.  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 
       
       The analyst noted that Block 25 "Separation Authority", Block 26 "Separation Code", and Block 28 "Narrative Reason For Separation" of the DD Form 214 under review are incorrect. 

       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 available records for the period of enlistment under review, the documents, and the issues he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicant’s release from the Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) Program.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government Regularity in the discharge process.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  In connection with such a discharge, the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  Procedurally, the applicant was required to consult with defense counsel and to voluntarily, and in writing, request 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.  In the absence of information to the contrary, the analyst presumed that all 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 would have been aware of that prior to requesting discharge.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant’s issue and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.  Further, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's accomplishments outlined with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  In view of the foregoing, 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.  
       
       
       
       
       
       Furthermore, the analyst noted that Block 25 "Separation Authority", Block 26 "Separation Code", and Block 28 "Narrative Reason For Separation" are incorrect.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst recommends to the Board that an administrative change be make to Block 25 "Separation Authority" to indicated AR 635-200, Block 26 "Separation Code" to indicate KFS, and Block 28 "Narrative Reason For Separation" to indicate In Lieu of Trial By Court-Martial.  Except for the foregoing modifications, as stated above, the analyst determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable.
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 4 May 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted 2 pages of additional documents in support of his personal appearance hearing.

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony, and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted to deny relief.  Furthermore, the Board noted the analyst recommendation that an administrative change be made to the applicant's DD form 214, however, the Board elected not to take action on the administrative change recommended by the analyst.  The Board determined that the applicant should apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), utilizing DD Form 149 regarding this matter.  An application for that Board is enclosed.  
        
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
								         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 									 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080016569
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages