Application Receipt Date: 060901 Prior Review Prior Review Date: Records/031015 I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant submitted no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board 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: 020117 Discharge Received: Date: 020125 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: C Company, Womack Army Medical Center, Fort Bragg, NC 28310 Time Lost: AWOL x 3, for a total of 31 days from (010624-010710), (010713-010719), (010728-010804). The applicant's mode of return from his periods of awol, are not part of the available records Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 681013 Current ENL Date: Reenl/010610 Current ENL Term: NIF Years ????? Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 6 Mos, 15 Days The applicant's creditable service for the period under review should be: 6 months and 15 days. The applicant has three periods of AWOL not shown on his DD Form 214, item 29, time lost, or on his DD Form 2-1, item 21. See charge sheet and DA Form 4187 Total Service: 13 Yrs, 9 Mos, 17 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USMC-880308-920307/HD USMCR-920308-940729/NA ARNG-940730-950606/NA RA-950607-970608/HD RA-970609-010609/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11B1P Infantryman GT: 97 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Saudi Arabia (901229-910525), Panama (980108-000107), (Prior Service) Combat: Kuwait Decorations/Awards: Navy Unit Commendation, GCMDL, NDSM, SWASMDLw/1BSS, SWASMDL (3), HSM, ASR, KLM, KLM (K), Combat Action Ribbon 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 on 10 December 2001, the applicant was charged with AWOL x 3, from (24 June 2001-10 July 2001, 13 July 2001-19 July 2001, 28 July 2001-4 August 2001, and dereliction of duty, in that he failed to abide by the terms of his government travel card). On 26 December 2001, 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 7 January 2002, 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, 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. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 5 February 2007 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: None 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, hearing his testimony 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, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge mitigated the discrediting entry in his 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. 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 SPC/E4. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Ron Williams, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: None RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: SPC/E4 XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 9 February 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060012811 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 6 pages