Application Receipt Date: 071226 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 071109 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: HHD, 1-222, AV Regt, Fort Eustis, VA Time Lost: AWOL for 26 days (070915-071010), apprehended. Pre-trial confinement for 21 days (071011-071101). Total time lost 47 days. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050523, disobeyed a lawful command from a CPT x 2 (050308) and (050326), broke restriction x 2, (050421) and (050425), reduction to E-5, $1,210 x1, and extra duty for 30 days (FG). 050706, disobeyed a lawful order from a CW4, (050530), and failed to report (050531), reduction to E-4, $978 (suspended), extra duty for 14 days, and restriction for 45 days (suspended) (FG). Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 731222 Current ENL Date: 021029 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 04 Yrs, 10 Mos, 15 Days ????? Total Service: 13 Yrs, 07 Mos, 09 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-940124-99114/HD RA-991115-021028/HD Highest Grade: E-6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 15R10 AH-64 Attack Helicopter Repairer GT: 89 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany/Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (030315-031120)/Iraq (040201-050313) Decorations/Awards: AGCM-4, NDSM, ICM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 24 October 2007, the applicant was charged with AWOL x 3 (070917-071003), (070827-070828), and (070915-070917); disobeyed a lawful command from a LTC x 4 (070825), (070915), (070915), and (071003); and assault x 2 (070620-070630) and (070710-070731). On 26 October 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 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 and intermediate commanders documentation recommending approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge is not part of the available record and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. On 2 November 2007, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. The record contains a blotter report dated 24 March 2005. 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 military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service. The analyst does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The analyst found that the overall length of the applicant's service; to include his combat service (2 tours), mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be partially 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 SGT/E-5. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 6 February 2008 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 5 No change 0 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - Reason (Board member names available upon request) IX. 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 is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The Board determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, to include his combat service, mitigated the discrediting entries in his 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 both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails a restoration of grade to SGT/E-5. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: SGT/E-5 XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 7 February 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070018915 Applicant Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 pages