Application Receipt Date: 060303 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293. 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: 941028 Discharge Received: Date: 941207 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Battery, US Army Air Defense Artillery Center, Fort Bliss, TX Time Lost: AWOL 76 days (940419-940511, 940608-940612, 940721-940906), applicant 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: 680414 Current ENL Date: 880909 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 06 Yrs, 02Mos, 29Days (Includes 89 days of excess leave (940910-941207)) Total Service: 08 Yrs, 02Mos, 03Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-860721-880908/HD Highest Grade: E5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 16S10 (Manpads or PMS Crewmember) GT: 111 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Korea, Germany Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM (2nd Award), AGCM (2nd Award), NDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR (2nd Award) 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 21 July 1994 to 7 September 1994. On 9 September 1994, 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 a under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits. The applicant did submit a statement in his own behalf. The commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 28 October 1994, the intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 10 November 1994, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of a under other than honorable conditions discharge and directed that he 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, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would warrant 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. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. The analyst determined that the overall length of the applicant's service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge, the recommendation by the intermediate commander for a general, under honorable conditions discharge, and the time that has elasped since his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. However, the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. This action will entail a grade restoration to sergeant/E5. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 070110 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 characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge, the recommendation by the intermediate commander for a general, under honorable conditions discharge, and the time that has elasped since his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry 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 narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it. This action does entail a grade restoration to sergeant/E5. 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: E5 XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 070116 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060003162 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages