Application Receipt Date: 060526 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293. 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: 911028 Discharge Received: Date: 911206 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: For the Good of the Service-In Lieu of Court Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: D Company, 1st Battalion, 5th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX Time Lost: AWOL 30 days 910820-910920, records do not show how he was returned to military authority. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 640605 Current ENL Date: 880223 Current ENL Term: 06 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 09Mos, 13Days ????? Total Service: 06 Yrs, 08Mos, 15Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-850221-880222/HD Highest Grade: E5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 54B10 (Chemical Operations Specialist) GT: 118 EDU: GED Overseas: Germany, SWA Combat: SWA (901009 to 910401) Decorations/Awards: ASR, NDSM, OSR, SWAM (w/2 bronze service stars), AAM, NCOPDR, GCMDL, V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that the applicant was charged with going AWOL from 20 August 1991 thru 20 September 1991. On 1 November 1991, 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 approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 18 November 1991, 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 independent evidence he submitted, it is recommended that the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his characterization of service be upgrade to general, under honorable conditions. 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 condone, his overall length and quality of service to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding his discharge, and the time that has elapsed since his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. However, the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. This action will entail a grade restoration to sergeant E5. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 061122 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 No change (Character) Change No change (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 was too harsh, 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 both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it. This action will entail a grade restoration to sergeant E5. Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: E5 XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 061127 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060007475 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages