Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/05/07	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: 090819, denied 5-0  

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues:   The applicant states, in effect, that he was being treated for cardiomyopathy.  The doctors had him on many different medications, that his decision making abilities were compromised and he did one event that was stupid.  Had he not had the cardiomyathy and not been on so many different medications he would have made better choices and been able to do the right thing.  Then he would have been medically discharged with a honorable discharge.

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: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 010712   Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: RFS Battalion, 3rd Support Company, Fort Campbell, KY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  17
Current ENL Date: 980806    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 11Mos, 7Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 11Mos, 7Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 74C10/Record Telecom Center Oper   GT: 110   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea    Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Tinker AFB, OK
Post Service Accomplishments: Nothing provided

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to the discharge from the Army.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS (i.e., for the good of the Service-in lieu of trial by court-martial) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "4."

       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 only pertinent evidence available for review regarding the applicant's discharge is the DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, which was not authenticated by the applicant.  The DD Form 214 shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In connection with such a discharge, the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.
       
       Procedurally, the applicant was required to consult with defense counsel and to voluntarily, and in writing, request 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.  In the absence of information to the contrary, 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.  It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant would have been aware of that prior to requesting discharge.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's contention concerning his medical issue, however, the record is void of facts, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the applicant's misconduct was the result of any medical condition.
       
       Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.
       
       Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that it appears 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 February 2011         Location: Dallas, TX

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers:  [ redacted ] 

Exhibits Submitted: Self authored statement, DD Form 214.

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony 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 1    No change 4
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: ?????										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: ?????






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 AR20100014485
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages