Application Receipt Date: 060111 Prior Review Prior Review Date: 051102 I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions. In addition, he requests a change in his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code from RE-4 to RE-3 "or which ever code appropriate for reentry." He states that he desires to reenter the military so he can serve his country with honor and dignity. 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: 040512 Discharge Received: Date: 040519 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: PCF, Special Processing Company, Fort Knox, KY Time Lost: 101 Days, AWOL from 040115 to 040425, Surrendered to military authorities. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 740326 Current ENL Date: 030429 Current ENL Term: NIF Years Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 9Mos, 9Days Total Service: 0 Yrs, 9Mos, 9Days Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92F10 (Petroleum Supply Specialist) GT: 95 EDU: NIF Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None listed. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that the applicant was charged with AWOL, from 040115 to 040425. On 29 April 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 3 May 2004, 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 requests 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 independent evidence he submitted, it is recommended to the Board that the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his characterization of service be denied. 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. All the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. It 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. The reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 060515 Location: Tampa, FL Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: Veterans Affairs Witnesses/Observers: Exhibits Submitted: 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 No change (Character) Change No change (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, hearing his testimony, and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's post service accomplishments and the circumstances surrounding the AWOL. This action does not entail a change in RE Code, which is does not fall under the purview of this Board. Case report reviewed and verified by: Richard P. Nelson, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: N/A Other: N/A RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: N/A XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: xx Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: xx DATE: 060605 Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder