PART II - APPLICATION DATA

      (Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy)

1.  Character of Discharge:  Uncharacterized

2.  Date of discharge (or REFRAD):  961017

3.  Authority for separation:

      a.  Regulation:  Chapter 10, AR 635-200

      b.  Reason:  In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial

4.  Prior review(s):  NONE



                         PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

                 SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

1.    Service data:                              2.  Awards and
    decorations:
                                           NDSM
    a.  Period entered for:  3 Years
    b.  Entry date:  940518
    c.  Age:  21 Years   DOB:  720914


    d.  Educational level:  HS Grad


    e.  Aptitude area score:
          GT:  93                                3.  Highest grade
achieved:
    f.  Length of Service:                         E1
          0 Year(s)  9 Month(s)  0 Day(s)

                                               4.  Performance evaluations:

                                                   NONE

                         PART III - SERVICE HISTORY
           SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued

5.  Periods of unauthorized absence:

    Status       Inclusive dates
      AWOL         941004-960603;

      Mil conf

      Civil conf

      Other


6.  Nonjudicial punishment:  NONE

      Date  Offense(s)



7.  Court-Martial data:  NONE

      a.  SCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


      b.  SPCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


      c.  GCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


8.    Remarks:  NONE


                       SECTION B - Prior Service Data
                                    NONE

Other discharge(s):

      Service    From  To    Type Discharge





                         PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

                       SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l.  Facts and Circumstances:

      a.  The evidence of record shows that on 11 June 1996, the applicant
was charged with AWOL (941004-960603).  On 11 June 1996, the applicant
consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing,
discharge under the provisions of Chapter l0, 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
uncharacterized discharge.  On 12 June 1996, the applicant was placed on
excess leave pending approval of his voluntary request for discharge.  On
12 July 1996, the separation authority approved the discharge with an
uncharacterized discharge.

      b.  On 17 October 1996, the applicant was discharged.  At the time of
discharge, the applicant had completed 9 months of active military service
and accrued 504 days of lost time in the period under review.

2.  Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action:  Army Regulation 635-200
sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
Chapter l0 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 requests 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
UOHC is normally considered appropriate.



                      SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS


1.  Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel.
    As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293.

2.  Exhibit(s) submitted:

      A-1:  DD Form 293, dated 030816, with nine (9) enclosure(s).
      A-2:  Counsel Issues:  NONE
      B-l:  Other Documents: NONE


                   PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED)

              SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion


Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor      ( ) Legal Advisor



      a.  Medical prehearing comments (if applicable):


      b.  Legal prehearing comments (if applicable):











                         PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING

                      SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits

1.  Review/hearing information:


      a. Type requested:
         ( X ) Records review             (   ) Hearing

      b. Type Held:
         ( X )Records review              (   ) Hearing
                                          (   ) Tender Offer

      c. Review/hearing location and date:  Washington, D.C. on 12 May
2004.

      d. Appearance by:
         Applicant                 (   ) Yes   ( X ) No
         Counsel                   (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

      e.  Applicant testified:     (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

      f.  Counsel presentation:    (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

      g.  Witness(es) testified:   (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

2.  Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing:
                        PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS

1.  a.  Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity:

          ( X )  Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A
              of this case report and directive.
          (   )  Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as
              follows:
          (   )  Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as
              follows:

      b.  Request:  ( X ) Recharacterization     ( X ) Change of Reason

2.  Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on
issues of propriety and/or equity:

      a.  Propriety:   The applicant has not submitted an issue of
                   propriety and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an
                   issue of propriety to change the discharge.

      b.  Equity:      The parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to
                   the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI,
                   Paragraph 1, above.

        (1)  The issue is rejected.  The Board carefully examined the
applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review.
 There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as
well as infraction of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness
of the offense.
The Board noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the official record
does not support the applicant’s contentions and the Board determined that
his contentions were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of
the discharge under review.  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 Board noted
that, after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily, and
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 Board was satisfied that all
requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant
were fully protected throughout the separation process.  It also noted that
the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally
under other than honorable conditions; however, the applicant’s service was
uncharacterized even though he was not entitled to this type of
characterization of service because he had served over 180 days of active
duty at the time his discharge was initiated.  It is the policy of the
Board not to correct an error if the correction would result in a less
favorable action to the applicant.  Therefore, the Board will not change
the applicant’s characterization of service on the current DD Form 214.
Individuals are assigned RE codes based on their service records or the
reason for discharge.  This Board found no bases upon which to change the
applicant’s reason for discharge because it was properly based upon his
record of AWOL.  An RE Code of 3 indicates that the applicant requires a
waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.  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 RE codes.  The Board, being convinced that the reason
for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and
equitable, voted to deny relief.

3.  Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s):  NONE

                           PART VII - BOARD ACTION
                   SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote

1.    Board conclusion(s):

      The discharge was:

      ( X ) Proper.
      (   ) Improper as to characterization.  Change characterization to
                                               .
      (   ) Improper as to reason.  Change reason to
                                   under                      .

      ( X ) Equitable.
      (   ) Inequitable as to characterization.  Change characterization to
                                         .
      (   ) Inequitable as to reason.  Change reason to
                                 
            under                                 .
      (   ) Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for
           separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should
           be changed to                      under
                                   .

2.  Voting record:      Change   No Change
                  Reason       0         5
    Characterization       0         5

        The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in
Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address
below.  The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right
corner of this document.

                  Department of the Army Review Boards Agency
                  ATTN:  Promulgation Team
                  1941 Jefferson Davis Highway, 2nd Floor
                  Arlington, VA  22202-4508



3.  Minority views:  NONE
                           PART VII - BOARD ACTION
                 SECTION B - Verification and Authentication

Case report reviewed and verified

                          
Ms. McKim-Spilker
Case Reviewing Official

                     PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
                            SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

                                    NONE

                          SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


ROBERT L. HOUSE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
   Review Board

Official:




MARY E. SHAW
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder

EXHIBITS:
A - Application for review of discharge                  C - Other
B - Material submitted by applicant

INDEX RECORD:

AR Number:  2003095761                    INDEX NUMBERS:  A9217
Date of Review:  040512                                   A9309
Character of Service:  EL                                 A9231
Date of Discharge:  961017                                A0100
Authority:  AR 635-200 C10
Reason:  A7100
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation:  NC 5-0 A













                           PART IX - VOTING RECORD

    Name                                   Reason          Characterization
                                           CHANGE   NC     HON  UHC   NC
UNCHAR

    1.      Mbr          X                 X       

    2.      Mbr          X                 X       

    3.      Mbr          X                 X       

    4.      Mbr          X                 X       

    5.      PO           X                 X