Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/12/29	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached document 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: 070625
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070717   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: 51st Chemical Co, Fort Polk, LA  

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:  30
Current ENL Date: 041230    Current ENL Term: Indef Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 06Mos, 18Days ?????
Total Service:  		14 Yrs, 07Mos, 23Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-921125-950209/HD
                                       RA-950210-980219/HD
                                       RA-980220-010319/HD
                                       RA-010320-041229/HD
Highest Grade: E-6		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 74D10 Chemical Operations Spec   GT: 107   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea/Germany/Bosnia   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM-3, AGCM-4, NDSM-2, AFEM, GWOTSM, KDSM, AFSM, ASR, OSR-2, NM

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

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 28 February 2007, the applicant was charged with intent to deceive, sign an official statement, to wit; that he had not viewed his Leave and Earning Statement (LES) on line or made any attempts to view them (051212-060808), steal military pay of a value of $500 or less, property of the United States Government (051211-060818), steal military pay of a value in excess of $500, property of the United States Government (060629-060824), and uttering worthless checks x 2 (060419) and (060420).  On 22 June 2007, 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 recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The intermediate and senior intermediate commanders recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 27 June 2007, 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.
       
       The applicant's record contains a CID Report of Investigation dated 30 May 2006.

       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 document he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit a partial upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as 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.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, the unit commander's recommendation for a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e., the testimony of the Director, Military Pay Office, Fort Polk, LA  during the Article 32 Investigation, which he testified that his staff failed to timely stop the applicant's special pay when he out-processed his last duty station and in-processed at Fort Polk, LA.  The Director,  Military Pay Office, also stated that there was a delay in getting the pay problem fixed, from August until February; and that the Government has some blame but not criminal.  Further, the special pay should have been stopped when the applicant departed his last duty station, and in-processed at Fort Polk, LA, or during the quarterly reviews.  Because the Military Pay Office missed these chances to stop his special pay, the Director,  Military Pay Office recommended approval to cancel the debt), mitigated the discrediting entries in the 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, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  An RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  In view of the foregoing, 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: 30 September 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: 



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 characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e., the testimony of the Director, Military Pay Office, Fort Polk, LA  during the Article 32 Investigation), mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  This action entails a restoration of grade to  SSG/E-6.
  
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 5    No change 0
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: SSG/E-6
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090001723
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages