Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 070925 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: Applicant did not submit any issues for the board to consider. 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: 020624 Discharge Received: Date: 020911 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: IN Lieu Of Trial By Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: HHC, 4th CMMC, Fort Hood, TX Time Lost: AWOL X 2 for 259 days (010731-010902 and 010903-020421) Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 010314, wrongful use of cocaine (001226-010126), reduction to E-2, $584 X1 (susp) 45 days extra duty (FG) Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NA Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Year/Month: 7808 HOR City, State: El Paso, TX Current ENL Date: 000811 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 01Mos, 00Days ????? Total Service: 04 Yrs, 04Mos, 05Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA 970811-000811/HD Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 91A10 Automated Logistical Spec GT: 93 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Korea Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, ASR, OSR, V. Post-Discharge Activity Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 25 Jone 2002, the applicant was charged with AWOL X 2 (010731-010902 and 010903-020421). The applicant's request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial is not contained in the available records. Therefore the analyst assumes government regularity in the discharged process. The file however contains the chain of commands recommendations to the applicant's request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant's chain of command recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 30 July 2002, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. The applicant consulted with defense counsel, and voluntarily in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated or lesser-included offenses under the UCMJ. The analyst noted that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 080801 Location: Washington DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: None 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 0 No change 5 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - 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 to deny relief. 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: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 080803 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070013355 ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 4 pages