Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/03/07	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was unjust because, yes he made a mistake but his past military history before that shows he was not an other than honorable soldier.

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: 100519
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 100609   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Company, 2nd Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment, 4th  Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX. 

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:  17
Current ENL Date: 061108    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  21 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 7 Mos, 2 Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 7 Mos, 2 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 19D10 Cavalry Scout   GT: 95   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (080603-090513)
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICMDLw/2 CS, 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 the applicant was charged with failing to go to his appointed place of duty x 2, (100304), (100304) and wrongfully using cocaine between (091229-100104).  On 18 May 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 submitted a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander and intermediate commander's recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  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 during the period of enlistment under review, and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found several mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.   
       
       This recommendation was made after full consideration of the applicant's 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 determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service and the applicant’s youth at the time of enlistment, 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 analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.  This action entails a restoration of grade to SPC/E-4.  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 28 September 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149 in lieu of a DD Form 293 dated 1 March 2011.
















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 and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board found that the length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record. 

Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  This action entails restoration of grade to SPC/E-4.
        
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: This action entails a restoration of grade "SPC/E-4" as indicated below.										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: SPC/E-4























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 AR20110011782
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages