Application Receipt Date: 070205	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: 970605/Record Review

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293 and letters of support

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: 911112
Discharge Received:     Date: 920206   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: For The Good of Service-In Lieu of Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: 612th Quartermaster Company, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: Absent without leave for a total of 109 days (910620-911006).  Applicant surrendered to military authority at Fort Belvoir, VA and was transferred to Fort Dix, NJ.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): No Article 15's were found in the available record, however, the "EREC Deserter Check List" makes reference to the applicant having a prior pending Field Grade Article 15 for wrongful distribution, possession and use of cocaine, Article 15 (910607) failure to repair on (910527) and Article 15 (910619) failure to repair (910608-910609).

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:    
Current ENL Date: 901016    Current ENL Term: 04 Years  24 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 00Mos, 03Days (Includes 122 days of excess leave 911008-920206)
Total Service:  02 Yrs, 07Mos, 06Days (Includes 1 yr, 7 mos, and 4 days of USAR time that was not shown on the applicant's DD Form 214).
Previous Discharges: USAR-870904-890407/UNC
Highest Grade: E2
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 76V10 (Equipment Storage Specialist)   GT: 95   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR, NDSM
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 16 October 1991, the applicant was charged with going AWOL from 20 June 1991 to 7 October 1991.  On 16 October 1991, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 for the good of the service in lieu of 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 a 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 reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 8 January 1992, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions and that he be reduced to private/E1.

      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, for the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted, 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, if the applicant desires to reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his eligibility to reenlist.  Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes.  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: 10 September 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: Yes [redacted]

Witnesses/Observers: Yes wife 

Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted 7 additional pages of documents.

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 4    No change 1   - Character
		 			      Change 0    No change 5   - 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 result it is now inequitable.  The Board found that the applicant's post service accomplishments and the time that has elasped since his discharge mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial 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.
  
, 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: NA

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 

CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 20 September 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE