Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/06/24	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, he does not believe he deserved an other than honorable discharge for his actions.  If he did he thinks he has paid for his actions by not having access to VA or GI bill benefits over the past 3 years.  He served four years ten months and twenty-one days of his five year enlistment.  His actions that caused his to be discharged were the result of following what the army had told him time and time before that family comes first and when he tried to follow what he had been taught he was discharged. 

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   ?????

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 070212
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070327   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: (Rear Detachment), 1st Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

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:  19
Current ENL Date: 020507    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	4 Yrs, 10 Mos, 21 Days ?????
Total Service:  		4 Yrs, 10 Mos, 21 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10 Infantryman   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Iraq   Combat: Iraq x 2 (030805 - 040805) and (060718 - 061130)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM x 3, AGCM, GWOTSM, GWOTEM, HSM, ICM, ASR, CIB, EIB

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Queen Creek, AZ
Post Service Accomplishments: None









VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 12 February 2007, the applicant was charged with missing a movement (070125) and disobeying an order, to get on the plane and fly forward with his unit to Iraq (070125).  
       
       On 4 March 2007, 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 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 9 March 2007, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed 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 the applicant’s available military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents submitted with the application, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.  
       
       This recommendation was made after full consideration of his 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 the overall length and quality of the applicant's service.  Additionally, the applicant had successfully completed two combat service tours.  
       
       While an investigation concluded that the applicant had an additional two weeks to prepare for deployment due to his family concerns, the supporting medical documents supporting the severity of his wife’s medical condition mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record.  
       
       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 E-5/SGT.  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 11 March 2011         Location: Washington, D. C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 with a self-authored statement, DD Form 214, Medical Records, enlistment contract, portion of discharge packet.

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 was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service to include his combat service and the circumstances surrounding his misconduct and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  This action entaixl restoration of grade to E-4/SPC.
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 3    No change 2
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: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: E-5/SGT






















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 AR20100017689
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages