Application Receipt Date: 060120 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293 and supporting documents. 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: 031119 Discharge Received: Date: 031222 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Company Support, 2nd Battalion, 72nd Armor Regiment, 2nd Infantry Division, Korea Time Lost: AWOL 42 days (030813-030923), applicant surrendered to military authority. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 800303 Current ENL Date: 020514 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05Mos, 27Days (Includes 81 days of excess leave 031003-031222) Total Service: 01 Yrs, 05Mos, 27Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 77F10 (Petroleum Supply Specialist) GT: 97 EDU: 1 yr College Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM 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 going AWOL from 13 August 2003 to 24 September 2003. On 9 October 2003, 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 2 December 2003, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to private E1. 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 independent evidence he submitted, it is recommended that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the circumstances surrounding his discharge mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. However, the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 061122 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA 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 and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change 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 and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 061127 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060001024 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages