Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2011/12/19 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that she was a model Soldier. She completed a 15 month overseas tour and then her life changed. She became angry and mad at the world and allowed fear to dictate her behavior; consequently, she engaged in acts that ended her service enlistment. She now realizes there were other avenues that could have helped her deal with the events that she encountered during her first tour. She does not want one bad mistake to ruin the rest of her life and tarnish the good deeds that she accomplished during her career. She was at her best when she was in the Army and would like reenlistment to be an option. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 090320 Discharge Received: Date: 090508 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial By Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 3rd Brigade Special Troops Battalion (Rear), Schofield Barracks, Hawaii Time Lost: AWOL x 1 for a total of 43 days (081223 - 090203), mode of return unknown. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 19 Current ENL Date: 050118 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 4 Yrs, 2 Mos, 10 Days ????? Total Service: 4 Yrs, 2 Mos, 10 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 25B10 IT Specialist GT: 103 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (060731 - 071025) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM w/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR x 2, MUC V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 20 March 2009, the applicant was charged with AWOL (081223 - 090204). On 23 March 2009, 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 she understood that she 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 her own behalf. The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of a bad conduct discharge. On 2 April 2009 , the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the discharge with a 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, under honorable conditions 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 the applicant’s available military records, the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The evidence of record shows 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 the applicant was aware of it prior to requesting discharge. Before initiating action to separate the applicant, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about the deficiencies, which could lead to separation. The analyst noted the command made an assessment of the applicant's potential for becoming a fully satisfactory Soldier. The evidence of record established that the applicant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome noted deficiencies. As the applicant did not subsequently conform to required standards of discipline and performance, the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service. The analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. At the time of discharge, the applicant received an under other than honorable conditions characterization and of service which constitutes a non-waivable disqualification. Additionally, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.” An RE code of “4” cannot be waived thus the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. 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: 8 June 2012 Location: Washington, D. C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 and a DD Form 214 VIII. 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. IX. Board Decision Board Vote: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) ????? X. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI. Certification Signature Approval Authority: ARCHIE L. DAVIS III Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board BONITA E. TROTMAN Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army Secretary Recorder????? Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20110024832 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 pages