Application Receipt Date: 061127 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See 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: 920708 Discharge Received: Date: 920727 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: For the good of the service, In lieu of trial by court martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: HHC, 3/9th IN BN, 7th IN Div, Fort Ord, CA Time Lost: Absent without leave for 62 days (920414-920614). Surrendered. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier's Overall Record DOB: 720321 Current ENL Date: 900821 Current ENL Term: 4 Years 14 weeks Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 09Mos, 06Days Applicant was placed on excess leave for 34 days (920624-920727). Total Service: 01 Yrs, 09Mos, 06Days Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11B10 Infantryman GT: 126 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR / NDSM V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states he has acquired various college degrees including a Bachelors (Political Science) and two Masters Degrees (Political Science and International Affairs and Administration). The applicant did not provide any supporting documents for these stated accomplishments. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 23 June 1992, the applicant was charged with AWOL (920414-920614). 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 10 July 1992, the separation authority approved the discharge with characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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 and the issues he submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant's characterization of service be upgraded 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 analyst noted the applicant's youth at the time of enlistment and an apparent lack of maturity. The analyst further noted that the applicant's misconduct and poor duty performance were a clear departure from acceptable Army standards, the analyst found that the offenses were partially mitigated by youth and immaturity. Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant's characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions. This action does not entail a restoration of grade. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: Location: Washington D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: 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 Case report reviewed and verified by: Edgar Yanger, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: Other: RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060016535 Applicant Name: Mr ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 4 pages