Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/07	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 149 and supporting 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: 061218
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070111   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: 96th ASB, Fort Campbell, KY 

Time Lost: AWOL x 4 for 32 days (050105-050111, 050630-050701, 050721-050721 and 060213-060310), mode of return unknown.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051015, failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty; reduction to E3, forfeiture of $438 pay, suspended, to be automatically remitted before 15 December 2005, extra duty for 14 days, oral reprimand (CG).

040630, disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer x3 (040507) and disrespectful in language to a noncommissioned officer (050407); reduction to E3, suspended to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 14 August 2004, extra duty for 14 days (CG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 010213    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	5 Yrs, 9Mos, 21Days ?????
Total Service:  		5 Yrs, 9Mos, 21Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 88M10 Motor Transport Operator   GT: 82   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Iraq   Combat: Iraq (030201-040115 and 050902-060921)
Decorations/Awards: AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, OSR x2

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None provided by the applicant

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 11 November 2006, the applicant was charged with being absent without leave (060217-060224), disobeying the lawful order of a commissioned officer (060223-060309), with intent to deceive making a false official statement x4 (060222, 060429, 060503 and 060508), and wrongfully fabricating information regarding the custody of his child and refusal to complete a Family Care Plan in order to avoid returning to his place of duty in Iraq (060222-060625).  On 15 December 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 did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 3 January 2007, 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, under honorable conditions 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 and documents 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 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, 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. The analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 

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:  22  January 2010          Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: N/A

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


								         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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090006857
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages