Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2010/04/19 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states "Naturally, my re-code was done wrong and I would like it changed. Now, it was to harsh for someone who never got into trouble in the first place. What if this world was perfect and no one would ever get into trouble. Easily, we see that is not possible. Now, human nature was meant to make mistakes and allowed to correct them. One can make a simple mistake, but does that mean they have to suffer for the rest of their lives. Naturally, I would like my re-code changed. Now, it was to harsh and would like my second chance to rejoin the army to finish what I once started and serve my country the way I know I can. Thank you! I would like to thank the United States Army for showing me that being in a team that really works for the same common goal; to serve and protect the United States. My goal is to finish what I once started, return into the Army and fulfill my duty. As a man, citizen and former soldier, I beg you Sir, Madam to allow me to return to the Army. Now, I would like to thank you for taking the time to read my plead and may God bless you all. Thank you." 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: 041119 Discharge Received: Date: 041230 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: A Company, 1/222D Aviation Regiment, 8th Transportation Brigade, Fort Eustis, VA Time Lost: AWOL x 1 from (040518-041017) for 153 days. The applicant surrendered to the military authorities at Fort Sam Houston, TX and was transferred to Fort Sill, OK. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 31 Current ENL Date: 040217 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 11 Days The computation includes 70 days of excess leave from (041022-041230) Total Service: 0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 11 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 21 October 2004, the applicant was charged with AWOL from (040518-041018). On 22 October 2004, 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 1 December 2004, 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, under honorable conditions 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 which 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 the applicant was aware of it prior to requesting discharge. The analyst noted the applicant's issue that his reentry eligibility (RE) code was done wrong and he would like it changed and it was to harsh for someone who never got into trouble in the first place. The analyst considered the applicant’s quality of service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge. Further, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.” An RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. Therefore, 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: 5 January 2011 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: Online application dated 28 March 2010. 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 0 No change 5 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: No Change Other: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20100013178 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages