Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2012/04/12 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he is requesting a change to his characterization of service based on information received from his First Sergeant that he had 180 days to leave the Army voluntarily. While in Advanced Individual Training (AIT) he was told he could not leave. He decided to go AWOL as the only option available to him. He contends although his discharge was later than 6 months he was dropped from the rolls while still in an entry level status. 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: 110930 Discharge Received: Date: 111025 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: C Co, 551st Sig Bn, Fort Gordon, GA Time Lost: AWOL x 1 for 110 days (110528-110914), apprehended. 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: 20 Current ENL Date: 110214 Current ENL Term: 04 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 04 Mos, 24 Days Includes 33 days of excess leave (110923-111025) Total Service: 00 Yrs, 04 Mos, 24 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: 137 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 22 September 2011, the applicant was charged with going AWOL (110528-110915). On 22 September 2011, 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 he understood he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and the discharge would have a significant effect on his eligibility for veteran’s benefits. The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 11 October 2011, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed 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, 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 military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues, and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which 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 the applicant was aware of it prior to requesting discharge. The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he had less than 6 months of service when he was dropped from the rolls and he was still in an entry level status. The analyst noted that the applicant was in entry-level status when he returned from a period of AWOL (i.e., he had completed less than 180 days of continuous active duty). However, the applicant was charged with AWOL and while still in an entry-level status voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In essence the applicant’s separation action was initiated while the applicant was in an entry-level status and command had the option to characterize his service under other than honorable conditions or to describe his service as uncharacterized. 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. The applicant by absenting himself from his unit without proper authority committed an act of serious misconduct which led to the separation under review. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that 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: 14 September 2012 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. IX. Board Decision Board Vote: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) X. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI. Certification Signature Approval Authority: ARCHIE L. DAVIS III Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board BONITA E. TROTMAN Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army Secretary Recorder ????? 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 AR20120007598 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 pages