PART II - APPLICATION DATA

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

1.  Character of Discharge:  Under Other Than Honorable Conditions

2.  Date of discharge (or REFRAD):  970114

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:  4 Yrs 17 Wks          ASR
    b.  Entry date:  940308
    c.  Age:  18 Years   DOB:  760224


    d.  Educational level:  HS Grad


    e.  Aptitude area score:
          GT:  124                               3.  Highest grade
achieved:
    f.  Length of Service:                         E2
          1 Year  3 Month(s)  17 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         950207-960820


      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


Other discharge(s):

      Service    From  To    Type Discharge
      USAR  930311     930913     Uncharacterized




                         PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

      a.  The evidence of record shows that on 23 August 1996, the
applicant was charged with AWOL (950207-960820).  On 23 August 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge.
 On 3 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.  On 14 January 1997, the applicant was discharged.  At the time of
discharge, the applicant had completed 1 year, 3 months, and 17 days of
active military service (to include 144 days of excess leave) and accrued
560 days of lost time due to AWOL in the period under review and had a
total of 1 year, 9 months and 19 days of active military service.

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 040607, with multiple 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 26 January
2005.

      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     (   ) 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, it
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 and that the
applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.  Individuals are
assigned RE codes based on their service records or the reason for
discharge.  The applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  An
RE Code of 3 indicates that the applicant requires a waiver prior to being
allowed to reenlist.  Changes to RE codes are not within the purview of
this Board.  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       2         3

        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
                  1901 South Bell Street, 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:  20040002893                   INDEX NUMBERS:  A9405
Date of Review:  050126                                   A9235
Character of Service:  UD                                 A9221
Date of Discharge:  970114                                A0100
Authority:  AR 635-200 C10
Reason:  A7100
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation:  NC 3-2 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