Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/02/05	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted bythe 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: 050421
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 050505   Chapter: 10      AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial 	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: E Co, 64th BSB, Fort Carson, CO 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040819, wrongful use of cocaine (040603-040607); reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $596 pay x 2 months, extra duty for 45 days, and restriction for 45 days (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  24
Current ENL Date: 040308    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 01Mos, 28Days ?????
Total Service:  		07 Yrs, 05Mos, 11Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ARNG-971125-980609/NA
                                       ADT-980610-980925/UNC
                                       ARNG-980926-020307/HD
                                       RA-020308-040307/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92F10 Petroleum Supply Spec   GT: 90   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Kuwait/Iraq (030401-040331)
Decorations/Awards: AAM, ARCAM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSB-2

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Morristown, TN
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant claims he earned an Associates Degree in science and is currently working toward a degree in Industrial Engineering. 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 18 April 2005, the applicant was charged with wrongful use of marijuana  (041213-050113).  On 18 April 2005, 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 applicant's chain of command recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 22 April 2005, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 

       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 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 an offense 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 analyst noted the applicant’s issues and the many accomplishments outlined in 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 characterization of service and reason for discharge 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: 14 October 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 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, to include his combat service, mitigated the discrediting entry in his 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 proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  








        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 3    No change 2
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 AR20090006169
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages