Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/07/10 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant stated, in effect, that he is seeking mental health treatment. 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 070910 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Company, 1/68th Armor Battalion, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, Fort Carson, CO 80913 Time Lost: AWOL x 2 for 27 days (070511-070605); (070611-070612), apprehended. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070214, Wrongfully used marijuana on or between (061112-061211); reduction to Private (E-1); forfeiture of $650.00 pay per month for two months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG) Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 18 Current ENL Date: 050308 Current ENL Term: 3 Years 16 Weeks Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 5 Mos, 6 Days ????? Total Service: 2 Yrs, 5 Mos, 6 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11C10 Indirect Fire Infantryman GT: 92 EDU: GED Certif Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (051115-061101) Decorations/Awards: ARCOMw/V Device, NDSM, GWTSM, ICMDL, ASR, OSR, CIB V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 14 June 2007, the applicant was charged with wrongfully using methamphetamine between on or about (070226-070312); wrongfully using methylenedioxy-methamphetamine between on or about (070226-070312); failing to go to his appointed place of duty x 2 (070326); (070326); AWOL x 2 (070511-070606); AWOL (070611-070612), and for the purpose of avoiding duty, intentionally injured himself by taking seriquel (070327); also, on 27 August 2007, he was additionally charged with wrongfully possessing alcohol while under the legal age of 21 x 2 (070123), and (070326). On 23 August 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 commander recommended disapproval; however, if the separation action is approved, recommend that an under other than honorable conditions discharge be issued. The intermediate commanders recommended disapproval of the applicant's request for a chapter 10 discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. On 30 August 2007, 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 military records, and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that 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 that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. In view of the foregoing, 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: 1 May 2009 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA 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 overall 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 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. IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 5 No change 0 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: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080011046 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages