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):  011228

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:
                                           NONE
    a.  Period entered for: 6 Years
    b.  Entry date: 000725
    c.  Age: 27 Years   DOB: 720825


    d.  Educational level: GED


    e.  Aptitude area score:
          GT: 112                                3.  Highest grade
achieved:
    f.  Length of Service:                         E1
         1 Year(s)  3 Month(s)  18 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         000804-000918;


      Mil conf     0

      Civil conf   0

      Other        0


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 27 September 2000, the
applicant was charged with AWOL from (000804-000919).  On 27 September
2000, 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 5 December 2001, 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 28 December 2001, the applicant was discharged.  At the time
of discharge, the applicant had completed 1 year, 3 months, and 18 days of
active military service and accrued 45 days of lost time.

      c.  The applicant was placed on excess leave pending finalization of
his chapter 10, discharge proceedings for a total of 457 days (000928-
011228).

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
under other than honorable conditions 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 040315, with six (6) 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, DC on 3 November
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:
          ( X )  Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as
              follows:

        (7)  The characterization of service is too harsh.

      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.

        (7)  The issue is accepted.  The Board carefully examined the
applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review.
 The Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, determined
that the characterization of service is now inequitable.  Notwithstanding
the propriety of the applicant’s discharge, the Board noted that because
the applicant was in an entry-level status, the approving authority had two
options as to characterization of service.  One option was to characterize
the applicant’s service as under other than honorable conditions and the
other was not to characterize the applicant’s service.  In view of the fact
that the applicant was in an entry-level status at time of initiation of
his separation, the Board determined that it would be more equitable to
uncharacterize the applicant’s service.  Accordingly, the Board voted to
grant partial relief by changing the characterization of service to
uncharacterized.

        (1-6)  The issue is rejected.  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, 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.  Further, the Board determined that the applicant was
appropriately assigned an RE code of 4, which indicates that the applicant
was separated from his last period of service with a nonwaivable
disqualifier and that he is ineligible for reenlistment.  The Board found
that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not
to change it.  See response to issue (2) above.

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                      .

      (   ) Equitable.
      ( X ) Inequitable as to characterization.  Change characterization to
           Uncharacterized.
      (   ) 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       5         0

        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

                          
MR. RON WILLIAMS
Case Reviewing Official

                     PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
                            SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

TO: ARBA Support Division-St Louis      Date:  5 November 2004

     The Army Discharge Review Board, established under the provisions of
Section 30, Public Law 346, 78th Congress, 22 June 1944 and codified as
Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553, in the case of the applicant
named in Part I directs that the ARBA Support Division-St Louis issue a new
DD Form 2l4 to the applicant which reflects the following directed
change(s):

           ( X ) Change characterization of discharge to “Uncharacterized.”


                          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:  2004105619                    INDEX NUMBERS:  A9406
Date of Review:  041103                                   A0113
Character of Service:  UD
Date of Discharge:  011228
Authority:  AR 635-200 CH10
Reason:  A7100
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation:  EL 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