Applicant Name: ?????

Application Receipt Date: 070806	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: My discharge should be changed because it is inequitable.  I want to re-enlist in the Army National Guard to serve my country and right the wrongs I've done.  This discharge bars me from having a chance to do that.  I was injured when I went AWOL, after being sent home from basic on leave to recover.  I was informed that I would have the chance to join again, and I had a new enlistment contract at the time I was discharged, and was supposed to ship to basic training.  I turned myself in after my recruiter told me that my FBI background check showed that I was wanted. I was unaware that I was still AWOL at the time I reenlisted.  Had I known that I was wanted, I would've turned myself in before that.  When I knew that I was AWOL, I tried to turn myself in multiple times, but the police and the army deserter information point told me that I wasn't wanted.  I had my discharge papers from the state of california after that, so I thought that I was no longer AWOLl.  I do not feel that an RE-4 code is warranted for my discharge.  I know that going AWOL was the wrong thing to do and the cowardly thing to do, but I want to make it right, and serve my country like I was supposed to in the first place.  I need to serve my country and fight terrorism and the enemies of america.  I regret going AWOL and not returning to basic like I should have.  I want to make it up to all those soldiers that went to Iraq and lost their lives in the name of freedom.  I was supposed to be there with them.  I just want the chance to do the right thing for myself, my country, my family and all of the soldiers in fighting a battle I should be part of.  After being discharged, I was informed that I would have to wait two years to reenlist.  I waited the two years, and am still unable to join because of the RE-4.  I recently went to MEPS and processed for the North Dakota Army National Guard, but couldn't enlist because of the RE-4 code.  Please change to a RE-3 so I can serve my country and protect america, or please change my reason for discharge so that it's possible for me to enlist again.

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: 040507
Discharge Received:     Date: 040521   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: Co B, 1-50 IN, Fort Benning, GA 31905 

Time Lost: AWOL for 332 days (030531-040502), surrendered.

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

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Year/Month:  7609  
HOR City, State: San Diego, CA
Current ENL Date: 030325/OAD    Current ENL Term: NIF Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 00  Yrs, 02 Mos, 19 Days ?????
Total Service:  00  Yrs, 11 Mos, 18 Days Includes 9 days of excess leave (040513-040521).
Previous Discharges: USN-951228-960223/UNC
                                      ARNG-020823-030123/NA
                                        (Concurrent Service)
Highest Grade: E-1
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: NIF   EDU: 14 Years   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The applicant's record does not contain the DD Form 258 (Charge Sheet), and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  However, the applicant's request for discharge in lieu of trial by courts-martial shows that he violated Article 86 of UCMJ by being AWOL on or about (030531-040503).  On 6 May 2004, 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 10 May 2004, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

      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 issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  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.  The analyst noted that 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.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.  Additionally, 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.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.
      
      
      
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 6 August 2008              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




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 0    No change 5   - Character
		 			      Change 0    No change 5   - 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  























								        
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: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 8 August 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070011653
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 6 pages