Application Receipt Date: 060224 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293. Applicant states that family problems and difficulties with transportation prevented him for returning from AWOL. 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 950518 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Company B, 3rd Battalion, 10 Special Forces Group (A), Fort Devens MA 01433 Time Lost: AWOL 56 days/Surrendered to military authorities at Fort Drum, Watertown, NY Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 671218 Current ENL Date: 940204 Current ENL Term: 2 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 3 Mos, 15 Days ????? Total Service: 6 Yrs, 9 Mos, 21 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA - 880602-910725/HD RA - 910726-940203/HD Highest Grade: E5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist GT: 96 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM, GCML (2), NCOPDR, ASR, OSR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Submitted. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 22 November 1994, the applicant was charged with AWOL (940919-941114). The record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to a discharge from the Army. However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS (i.e., in lieu of trial by court-martial) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of '3.' On 3 May 1995, Department of the Army, Headquarters, Fort Dix, New Jersey, Orders 123-76, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date: 18 May 1995. 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 at any time after the charges are preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court martial. 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 issue he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct. While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. The analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, and the time that has elasped since his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. However, the reason for discharge remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 20 December 2006 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: N/A Witnesses/Observers: N/A Exhibits Submitted: N/A 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 characterization of service was too harsh and as a result it is inequitable. The Board determined that the the time that has elapsed since his discharge, the overall length and quality of the applicant's service and the circumstances surrounding his discharge mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully Honorable. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails a restoration of grade to 'SGT/E-5.' Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. John Zangas, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: None RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: SGT/E-5 XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 21 December 2006 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060002810 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages