Application Receipt Date: 060608	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See DD Form 293 with attachments

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: 060424
Discharge Received:     Date: 060512   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: Company B, 601st CS Battalion, Ketterbach, Germany 

Time Lost: AWOL, for a total of 39 days from (060221-060329).  He surrendered to the military authorities at Fort Knox, KY  40121-5122

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  740713  
Current ENL Date: Reenl/050907    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 6 Mos, 27 Days The applicant was placed on excess leave for a total of 39 days, from (060404-060512)
Total Service:  7 Yrs, 10 Mos, 27 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: ARNG-980507-980902/NA
                                      IADT-980903-990302/HD
                                      ARNG-990303-991025/HD
                                     RA-991026-030311/HD
                                     RA-030312-050906/HD
Highest Grade: E5
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 44B10 Metal Worker   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea, Germany, Southwest Asia   Combat: Kuwait/Iraq (040614-050325)
Decorations/Awards: AAM, GCMDL, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: See DD Form 293 with attachments

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 3 April 2006, the applicant was charged with AWOL, from (21 February 2006 to 30 March 2006).  On 3 April 2006, 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 28 April 2006, 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 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 issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority.  The analyst does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, determined that the discharge was inequitable.  The analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  This action entails a restoration of grade to SGT/E5.  Additionally, this action does not entail a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code; however, the Board can consider it.   
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 7 February 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: N/A




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     No change    (Character)
		 			       	Change     No change    (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 and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result, it is inequitable.  While the Board does not condone the applicant's misconduct, it determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry in the service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it.  This action entails a restoration of grade to SGT/E5.  This action does not entail a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code.  

















Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Ron Williams, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: None
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: SGT/E5

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

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

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 9 February 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060008173

Applicant Name:  Mr.       
______________________________________________________________________


Page 6 of 6 pages