Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2011/03/23 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states: "I have not been AWOL. I finished my first enlistment and want to show the error that was made. I want to reenlist with the Army to finish my 20 years." 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: 001002 Discharge Received: Date: 010205 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: A Co, 2-54th IN Bn (ITB), Fort Benning, GA Time Lost: AWOL for 290 days (990117-991102), surrendered. 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: 36 Current ENL Date: IADT 990103 Current ENL Term: NIF Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 03 Mos, 13 Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 10 Mos, 21 Days includes 454 days of excess leave (991110-010205); block 12e of the DD Form 214 total prior inactive service, is incorrect and should read 02 Yrs, 07 Mos, 08 Days. Previous Discharges: ANG-960521-970624/GD (Break in Service) ARNG-980730-990102/NA (Concurrent Service) Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: 104 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Waynesboro, VA Post Service Accomplishments: The record indicates that the applicant was still serving in the USAR in 2004 and was promoted to SGT/E-5 effective 1 September 2004. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 9 November 1999, the applicant was charged with absenting himself from his unit (AWOL) (990117-991103). On 9 November 1999, 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 the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 19 December 2000, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request 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 issues, and the 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 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 the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. Although the applicant did not properly annotate the DD Form 149 requesting a review of his record for a possible upgrade of his discharge; he was given the benefit of this review as instructed in pertinent part (E.3.1.3.2) by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. The analyst noted the applicant's issue about wanting to reenlist, however, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.” An RE code of “4” cannot 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: 25 July 2011 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149; two (2) DA Forms 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated (031115), (051216); Army/Ace Registry Transcript Sysytem, two (2) pages, (040214); DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated (030111). VIII. 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 to deny relief. 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: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None 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 AR20110005694 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 pages