Application Receipt Date: 070213

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See DD Form 293.

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: 011221
Discharge Received:     Date: 020227
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu Of Trial By Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: B Company 3rd Bn 505th PIR Fort Bragg, NC 28310

Time Lost: AWOL-74 days (010327-010610), surrendered to military
authorities at Fort Lewis, WA on (010611), and transferred to Fort Sill,
OK.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): The unit commander stated is his
recommendation memo that the applicant received an article 15.  However,
document not in file (NIF).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  800901
Current ENL Date: 980630    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  17 weeks
Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 05 Mos, 14 Days applicant had 258 days excess
leave (010615-020227).
Total Service:  03 Yrs, 05 Mos, 14 Days      
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No
MOS: 11B1P Infantryman   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat:
None
Decorations/Awards: ASR; the following awards are listed on the applicant's
DD Form 293, AAM, OSR.  However, record is void of documentation to
validate awards.
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: Tumwater, WA
Current Address: 303 East 6th St.
Morris MN 56267
United States
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant claims he is a honor student at
the University Of Minnesota.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 14 June 2001, the applicant was
charged with AWOL (010327-010610) .  On 15 June 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 submitted a statement
in his own behalf.  The unit commander recommended approval of an under
other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 21 September 2005, 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 during
the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he
submitted, the analyst recommend that relief be denied in this case.  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 courts-martial.  In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the
stipulated or lesser included offenses under 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 this
prior to requesting discharge.  Further, at the time of discharge the
applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of
“4.”  An RE code of “4” can not be waived and the applicant is no longer
eligible for reenlistment.  The analyst determined that 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: 16 April 2007
Location: Chicago, IL

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No

Counsel: No

Witnesses/Observers: No

Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted three additional documents in
support of his personal appearance hearing.



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 testimony, and considering
the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the
discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.





















Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner

X.  Board Action Directed
No Change
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: None
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority:

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official:


MARY E. SHAW                      DATE: 4 May 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder