Application Receipt Date: 060713	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See DD Form 293.  The applicant stated that he wishes to reenlist in the Army for a career.

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: 011214
Discharge Received:     Date: 020321   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: Company B, 30th Adjutant General Battalion (Reception), Fort Benning, GA 31905  

Time Lost: AWOL 73 days (010927-011209).  He surrendered to the military authorities at Fort Knox, Kentucky 40171

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

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  790622  
Current ENL Date: 010801    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 8 Days The applicant was placed on excess leave for a total of 97 days, from (011215-020321).
Total Service:  0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 8 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E1
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 96   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: See DD Form 293.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 14 December 2001, the applicant was charged with AWOL (010927-021209).  On 14 December 2001, 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 22 February 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.  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 at any time after the charges are preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court martial.  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, and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his characterization of service be denied.  The applicant’s contention is noted; however, said contention is 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 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.  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.  The reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 8 January 2007              
Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: Three letters of reference from personal and professional associates.




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, hearing his/her testimony, 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 now inequitable.  The Board found that the circumstances surrounding the AWOL, and his post service accomplishments mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade in the characterization of service to uncharacterized.  The Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  This action entails a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to “3.”

















Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. John Zangas, 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: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

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

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 11 January 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060009815

Applicant Name:  Mr.       
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages