Applicant Name:  ????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/01/12	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: Denied, 14 Mar 08, Vote: 2/3      

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See the DD Form 293 and attached documents 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: 971024
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 980127   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: HHC, 3-325th IN Bn (Ranger), Ft Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 970122, disobeyed a lawful order and disrespectful language toward a CSM on (970108) reduced to E4, forfeiture of $250 pay per month for two months, suspended to be automatically remitted unless vacated on or before 970421, extra duty for 45 days (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  25
Current ENL Date: 950622    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 07Mos, 06Days ?????
Total Service:  		9 Yrs, 06Mos, 10Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 880707-910702/HD
                                       RA 910703-931228/HD
                                       RA 931229-950621/HD
Highest Grade: E5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 91B/Medical Spc   GT: 101   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Saudia Arabia (900808-910207)
Decorations/Awards: SWA-2BSS, AGCM, NDSM, ASR, KLM, KLM(K), CMB, EFMB 

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

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 24 October 1997, the applicant was charged with failure to report (970820), three specifications of disrespect to a commissioned officer (970817-970821), disobeying a lawful order from a commissioned officer (970820), and two specifications of wrongfully communicating a threat to a commissioned officer and to a civilian (970821 & 971001).  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 and intermediate senior commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 5 December 1997, the separation authority approved the discharge with 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 available military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents he submitted with the application, 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 the former Soldier’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the 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 the combat service, mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record.  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.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.  This action entails a restoration of grade to SPC/E-4.  Further, the analyst determined that the applicant was incorrectly assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3”.  Therefore, the analyst recommends that the reentry eligibility code be administratively changed to RE-4.  However, the reason for discharge remains both proper and equitable.  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 24 August 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel:  The American Legion
                 1608 K Street NW
                 Washingon, DC  20006

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: None

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 characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service to include his combat service, as a result, it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief by changing the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  Further in its review, the Board noted an administrative error on the DD Form 214, block 27, reentry code and directed an administrative correction be made to read "RE4".  The Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.
        
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: E4
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090002546
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages