Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 080723 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant 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? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 041202 Discharge Received: Date: 071106 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu Of Trial By Court Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: C Co 704th Spt Bn, $BCT, Fort Hood, TX Time Lost: AWOL X 6 for 141 days (070220-070321,070322-070425, 070519-070614, 070830-070905, 070921-070924 and 070926-071106); surrendered to military authorities. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NA Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NA Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 23 Current ENL Date: 041202 Current ENL Term: 5 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 11Mos, 05Days ????? Total Service: 04 Yrs, 04Mos, 08Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA 030212-041201/HD Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 68J10 Medical Logistics Sp GT: 103 EDU: GED Cert Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (031001-040329) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ICM, NCODP, ASR, OSR 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 2 December 2004 the applicant was charged with AWOL X 4 (070220-070423, 070519-070614, 070830-070905, and 070921-070924) and assault on a non-commission officer X 2 (070921). 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 commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 30 October 2007, the separation authority approved the discharge with characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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 medical 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 and honorable 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 length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, and the supporting medical documents from the Fort Hood Resilience and Restoration Center, Carl R. Darnall Army Medical Center, mitigated the discrediting entries in his 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 reason for discharge 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: 080917 Location: Washington DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: None 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 based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service to include his combat service and medical diagnosis and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was 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 Issue a new DD Form 214 Colonel, U.S. Army Change Characterization to: President, Army Discharge Review Board Change Reason to: Other: ????? RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: E4/SPC ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080011544 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 3 pages