Application Receipt Date: 060330 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293. The applicant avers in essence that a diagnosis regarding a condition (not elaborated) was not made while he was in the Army and that he had no document to offer in support of his statement. 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: 921029 Discharge Received: Date: 930208 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: For the Good of the Service-In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Battery, 1st Battalion, 3rd Field Artillery, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, Texas 76545 Time Lost: AWOL for a total of 152 days from (920723-920918) and (921105-930208)/ Soldier surrendered to military control at HHB, 1st Bn, 3d FA 1st CD, Fort Hood, Texas 76545 AWOL 5 days from (920524-920528)/Soldier was returned by civil authorities to military control at Fort Hood, HHB, 1st Bn, 3d FA 1st CD, Fort Hood, Texas 76545 )See DA Form 4187-E) Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 710518 Current ENL Date: Reenl/920402 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 10 Mos, 5 Days ????? Total Service: 2 Yrs, 4 Mos, 9 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-900910-901016/NA ADT-901017-910125/Unch USAR-910126-920401/N/A Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 13B10, Cannon Crewmember; 76V10, Storage and Handling Spcialist GT: 93 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR, NDSR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None were submitted. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 25 September 1992, the applicant was charged with AWOL (920723-920918). On 16 October 1992, 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 submitted a statement in his own behalf. The unit, and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 2 November 1992, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 5 November 1992, the applicant again went AWOL and was discharged in absentia effective date: 8 February 1993. 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 a mitigating factor 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 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: 31 January 2007 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 discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it. 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: ????? XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 2 February 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060004595 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages