Applicant Name:  ?????

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

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 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: 060207
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060316   Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: B Co, 1-9 IN Bn, Fort Carson, CO 

Time Lost: AWOL on two occasions, (060104-060120), 17 days, apprehended and (060203-060207), 5 days, apprehended.  Total time lost is 22 days.

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:  21
Current ENL Date: 040203    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 00Mos, 22Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 00Mos, 22Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10/Infantryman   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea, Iraq   Combat: Iraq (040815-050722)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR, ICM, CIB

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Clarence, NY
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant provided a document that indicates he was certified as an Automotive Detail Specialist and was named employee of the month.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 3 February 2006, the applicant was charged with being AWOL on two occasions (060104-060120 and 060203-060207), being disrespectful to a NCO (060202), violating a general order by wearing his BDUs at a bar (060201), and with breaking restriction two times (060131 and 060201).  On 16 February 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 submitted a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 27 February 2006, 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 available military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues, and the documents submitted with the application, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be partially 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 his combat service, and the supporting documents, mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record.  The analyst noted that the applicant’s incidents of misconduct occurred over a period of one month and upon return from his combat tour in Iraq.  The record does not show any documents that would indicate that he was enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) nor that he recived any UCMJ action for misconduct.  The record shows the applicant was processed for separation as a SPC/E-4. 
       
       Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the reason for discharge remains both proper and equitable.  This action entails a restoration of grade to SPC/E-4. 
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 1 February 2010         Location: Washington, D.C.

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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 2    No change 3
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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090008564
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages