Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/05/27	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 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: 050124
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 050208   Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: L Trp, 3-3 ACR, Fort Carson, CO 

Time Lost: 13 days, AWOL (041022-041103), apprehended; 27 days, AWOL (041104-041230), apprehended.  Total time lost 40 days.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 041020, the unit commander’s memorandum indicates the applicant received a company grade Article 15 for failure to report; his punishment was 14 days of extra duty and restriction.  The Article 15 is not contained in the record.

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 020719.  Contract in the OMPF indicates entry on 020708    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 06Mos, 20Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 06Mos, 20Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 19D10/Cavalry Scout   GT: 102   EDU: GED   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Kuwait/Iraq (030331-040228)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM (in OMPF but not in DD Form 214), NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Globe, AZ
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 10 January 2005, the applicant was charged with desertion, in that on 4 November 2004, without authority and with the intent to remain away permanently, absented himself from his unit and did remain so absent in desertion until his apprehension on 30 December 2004.  He was also charged with being AWOL (041022-041103), and with breaking restriction (041104).    
       
       On 11 January 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 unit commander recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 3 February 2003, 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.
       

       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 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.  
       
       The applicant contends that he was young but the analyst noted that he met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.  Additionally, the applicant also contends that he had good service as noted by the awards he received; however, the record shows his service was marred by the repeated incidents of misconduct which included being AWOL for 27 days until his apprehension and his Article 15 for failure to report to his designated place of duty.
       
       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: 2 April 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 0    No change 5
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


















Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090009978
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages