Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/09/22	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant submitted no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the board.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   Yes, the applicant accepted the tender offer on 8 April 2010.

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 060213
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060306   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: Battery B, 1st Battalion, 5th Field Artillery, 1st Brigade, 1st Infantry Division (Mech), Fort Riley, KS. 

Time Lost: AWOL x 1, for 35 days from (060127-060302).  The applicant returned to his unit. 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051220, Wrongfully used marijuana between on or about 051005 and on or about 051103; failed to go to his appointed place of duty on or about 051206; reduction to the grade of Private (E-1); forfeiture of $617.00 pay per month for 2 months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days, and an oral reprimand (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 040401    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  16 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 	1 Yrs, 10 Mos, 0 Days ?????
Total Service:  		1 Yrs, 10 Mos, 0 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B10 Cannon Crewmember   GT: 105   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea (040816-050908)   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR

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

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 27 January 2006, the applicant was charged with failing to go to his appointed place of duty x 5, on or about 060107; 060112; 060118; 060124; 060124; disrespectful in language toward SSG, a noncommissioned officer on or about 060123; disrespectful in language and deportment toward SFC, a noncommissioned officer on or about 060123; disrespectful in language and deportment toward SFC, a noncommissioned officer on or about 060123; and wrongfully used marijuana between on or about 051030 and on or about 051128.  
       
       On 31 January 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 1 March 2006, the separation authority approved the discharge 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 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, the issue and document he submitted, the analyst determined that the characterization of service is improper.  
       
       The analyst noted that the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a biochemical test that was part of the applicant’s Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) treatment plan.  This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85.  Use of this information mandates award of a fully honorable characterization of service.  
       
       Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 8 April 2010         Location: Atlanta, GA

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 improper.  

The Board noted that the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a biochemical test that was part of the applicant’s Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) treatment plan.  This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85.  Use of this information mandates award of a fully honorable characterization of service.  

Accordingly, the Board voted to change the characterization of service to fully honorable.  However, the board found that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record 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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090016468
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages