Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/04/27	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he believes his discharge was unjust because he wanted help by going to the Army Substance Abuse Program and couldn't go.  He still would like to sign up for classes to better educate himself.  

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: 100910
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 101018   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: E Troop, 2nd Squadron, 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment, Fort Irwin, CA 

Time Lost: AWOL x 2 from (100201-100212) for 12 days, the applicant was apprehended; AWOL from (100802-100825) for 24 days, the applicant returned to his unit.  Total time lost was 36 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: Reenl/091002    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  The applicant extended his period of reenlistment for 8 months on (091002) giving him a new ETS date of: (130601).
Current ENL Service: 	0 Yrs, 11 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Total Service:  		4 Yrs, 11 Mos, 9 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 051004-091001/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10 Infantryman   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (060803-071004)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, GCMDL, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICMDLw/2 CS, ASR, OSR, CIB

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

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 8 September 2010, the applicant was charged with AWOL x 2 from (100201-100212) and AWOL from (100802-100825) and wrongfully using methamphetamines.  On 23 September 2010, 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 commander's recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 21 September 2010, 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, 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 which 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 the applicant was aware of it prior to requesting discharge.  
       
       Additionally, the analyst noted that the DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document-Drug Testing) found in the applicant's official record shows that the test was coded RO which indicates "Rehabilitation Testing.”  The commander directs an individual test based on the soldiers alcohol/drug abuse treatment plan.  The commander has a suspicion that a Soldier is using a controlled substance; however, does not have probable cause.  The Limited Use Policy applies to this test basis, per AR 600-85.  However, the evidence of record contains two DA Form 4187, Personnel Action that indicate the applicant went AWOL from his unit and upon his return would have had to be tested based on the commanders unit policy letter or SOP.  Further, the applicant states on his DD Form 293 that he "wanted to go to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), and couldn't go."
       
       The applicant's return from AWOL status would have given the unit commander probable cause to direct the urinalysis.  Additionally, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, who would have informed him if the Limited Use Policy applied.  In view of the aforementioned, the analyst determined that the code on the DD Form 2624 was in all likelihood incorrect and should have been coded IO for “Inspection other” instead of RO for “Rehabilitation Testing.”  The analyst concluded that the rights of the applicant were not prejudiced by the error on file in this case.  The evidence did not create a substantial doubt that the discharge would have been any different if the error had not been made.
       
       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: 4 November 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149 dated 20 April 2011 in lieu of a DD Form 293.






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: No Change
Other: No Change										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change


















Official:




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder





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 


Page 1 of 3 pages