Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/03/27	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 060925
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 061011   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: Company B, 369th AG Battalion, Fort Jackson, SC 

Time Lost: AWOL x 2, from (060501-060513) for 13 days; mode of return is unknown; and AWOL, from (060606-060828), for 84 days; apprehended by the civilian authorities at Streetsboro, OH and transferred to Fort Knox, KY. Total time lost 97 days.

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

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 060126    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 10 Days Includes 34 days of excess leave from (060908-061011)
Total Service:  		0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 10 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-1		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 119   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 7 September 2006, the applicant was charged with AWOL, from (060606-060829).  On 7 September 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 27 September 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, and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The evidence of record indicates that 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; however, Army Regulation 635-200, provides in pertinent part, that a soldier is in entry-level status for the first 180 days of continuous active duty.  The purpose of the entry-level status is to provide the soldier a probationary period.  Soldiers who are found to lack the necessary motivation, adaptability, self-discipline, ability, or attitude to become productive soldiers may be expeditiously separated while in entry-level status.  Army Regulation 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a soldier’s service will be uncharacterized when his separation is initiated while the soldier is in entry level status.  However, the evidence of record shows that the applicant went AWOL on two separate occasions and upon his return to military control voluntarily and in writing requested separation from the Army in lieu of a trial by court-martial, after consulting with his legal counsel.  Additionally, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.  Further, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.   
       
       Notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the analyst found that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 24, the characterization of service as bad conduct.  In view of the error, the analyst recommends to the Board that an administrative change be made to block 24, characterization of service to "Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, as approved by the separation authority.  Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's characterization of service, the analyst determined that the reason for separation was 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 January 2010         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA 







VIII.  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, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 24, character of service as bad conduct.  In view of the error, the Board directed that an administrative change be made to block 24, character of service to "Under Other Than Honorable Conditions,” as approved by the separation authority.  Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's characterization of service, the Board determined that the reason for separation was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090007350
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages