Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2010/11/30 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he made a mistake as a young 25 year old who went AWOL. He has since matured and can now see the mistake which he made. He has made the appropriate changes in his life and has two children and expecting twins. As a father he needs an alternate way to support his family. 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: 990218 Discharge Received: Date: 990910 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Detachment, 215th Finance Batttalion, Fort Hood, TX Time Lost: AWOL x 1 from (980713-980814) for 32 days. The applicant surrendered to the military authorities at Fort Meade, MD and was transferred to Fort Knox, KY. 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: 25 Current ENL Date: 970820 Current ENL Term: 2 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 11 Mos, 19 Days ????? Total Service: 9 Yrs, 1 Mos, 18 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR 890804-900619/NA RA 900620-940223/HD RA 940224-970819/HD Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92Y10 Unit Supply Spec GT: 97 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany (901210-920420), Saudi Arabia (901226-910503), Korea (941001-950903), Southwest Asia Combat: Kuwait (901226-910503) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM (2), AAM (2), GCMDL, VUA, NDSM, SWASMw/3 BSS, KLM (sa), KLM (KU), ASR, OSR, 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 19 August 1998, the applicant was charged with AWOL from (980703-980815). On 19 August 1998, 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 15 March 1999, 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. The applicant received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for driving under the influence of alcohol dated 7 May 1996, (Administrative) 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, under honorable conditions 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 available military records, the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found several mitigating factors which would merit a partial upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The analyst does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The analyst determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service to include his combat service mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the board that partial relief be granted in the form of an upgrade of the applicant’s characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. This action entails a restoration of the applicant's grade SPC/E-4. The analyst noted the applicant's issue requesting an honorable discharge and that he has young when he made the mistake of going AWOL. The applicant by his misconduct diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. Further, the analyst found that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. The analyst further found no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 22 July 2011 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: Yes. Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149 in lieu of a DD Form 293 dated 18 November 2010, two Character Reference Letters with various dates. 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, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh and as a result it is inequitable. The Board found that the length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service mitigated the discrediting entry in the service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails restoration of grade to SPC/E-4.] IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 5 No change 0 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: No Change Other: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: SPC/E-4 Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20100028765 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 3 pages