Application Receipt Date: 061020 Prior Review Prior Review Date: NONE I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD293 II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 051221 Discharge Received: Date: 060126 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial By Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: HHD 2d Chemical Bn, 13th Corps Support Command, Ft. Hood, TX Time Lost: AWOL for 6 days (051206-051211) Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051105, disrespectful in deportment towards a CW3, 1SG, and SSG (051005); and disobeying a lawful order from a SSG x 2 (051005); 45 days extra duty and restriction (FG). Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier's Overall Record DOB: 831006 Current ENL Date: 050328 Current ENL Term: 5 Years 17 weeks Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 9Mos, 23Days Total Service: 0 Yrs, 9Mos, 23Days Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 88M10 Motor Trasport Op GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (050817-050915) Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 15 December 2005, the applicant was charged with AWOL (051206-051211); disrespecting a superior commissioned officer x 2 (051125); willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer (051125); and breaking restriction (051125). 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 recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 10 January 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 available military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents he submitted, 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 service, as well as his 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 that the overall applicant's service, to include his combat service, and the supporting medical documents, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. This action entails a restoration of grade to PV2/E-2. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 071218 Location: Washington DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change 4 No change 1 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - Reason (Board member names available upon request) IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation Case report reviewed and verified by: Timon M. Oujiri, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: Other: RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: E-2 XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060014938 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 4 pages