PART II - APPLICATION DATA

      (Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy)

1.  Character of Discharge:  Under Other Than Honorable Conditions

2.  Date of discharge (or REFRAD):  010615

3.  Authority for separation:

      a.  Regulation:  Chapter 10, AR 635-200

      b.  Reason:  In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial

4.  Prior review(s):  Records Review/020619



                         PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

                 SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

1.    Service data:                              2.  Awards and
    decorations:
                                           ASR
    a.  Period entered for:  4 Years
    b.  Entry date:  990608
    c.  Age:  28 Years   DOB:  710122
    d.  Educational level:  Col Grad
    e.  Aptitude area score:
          GT:  118                               3.  Highest grade
achieved:
    f.  Length of Service:                         E4
          2 Years  0 Months  8 Days

                                               4.  Performance evaluations:

                                                   NONE

                         PART III - SERVICE HISTORY
           SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued

5.  Periods of unauthorized absence:  NONE

    Status       Inclusive dates
      AWOL

      Mil conf

      Civil conf

      Other


6.  Nonjudicial punishment:  NONE

      Date  Offense(s)



7.  Court-Martial data:  NONE

      a.  SCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


      b.  SPCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


      c.  GCM:
            Date   Offense(s)


8.    Remarks:  NONE


                       SECTION B - Prior Service Data
                                    NONE

Other discharge(s):

      Service    From  To    Type Discharge





                         PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

                       SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l.  Facts and Circumstances:

      a.  The evidence of record shows that on 13 April 2001, the applicant
was charged with assaulting a SGT, SFC and a CSM, three specifications,
(010113), (010131), and (010326); disrespectful in language towards a CPT,
1LT, 2LT, LTC, four specifications, (010113), (010131). (010131), and
(010326); assaulting a CPT (010113); disobeying a lawful order from a CPT
(010113); disobeying a lawful command from a CPT (010113), offering
violence against a LTC (010326); disobeying a lawful command from a LTC
(010326); disobeying a lawful order from a SFC (001201); disrespectful in
deportment towards a SFC (001228); disobeying a lawful order from a SFC
(010113); disrespectful in language toward a SFC, SGT, SFC, three
specifications, (010113), (010113), and (010131); disobeying a lawful order
from a SGT, SFC, SGT, three specifications, (010113), (010131), and
(010131); disrespectful in language towards a SSG (010131); disobeying a
lawful order from a CSM (010326); disrespectful in deportment towards a CSM
(010326); and wrongfully impersonating a commissioned officer, two
specifications, (010131) and (010326).   On 14 May 2001, the applicant
consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing,
discharge under the provisions of Chapter l0, 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.  On 15 May 2001, the unit and intermediate
commander recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions
discharge.  On 22 May 2001, the separation authority approved the discharge
with an under other than honorable conditions discharge and directed the
reduction of the applicant to the lowest enlisted grade.

      b.  On 15 June 2001, the applicant was discharged.  At the time of
discharge, the applicant had completed 2 years and 8 days of active
military service in the period under review.

2.  Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action:  Army Regulation 635-200
sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
Chapter l0 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 requests 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.


                      SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS


1.  Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel.
    As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293.

2.  Exhibit(s) submitted:

      A-1:  DD Form 293, dated 040108, with two (2) enclosures.
      A-2:  Counsel Issues:  NONE
      B-l:  Other Documents: NONE
                   PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED)

              SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion


Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor      ( ) Legal Advisor



      a.  Medical prehearing comments (if applicable):


      b.  Legal prehearing comments (if applicable):











                         PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING

                      SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits

1.  Review/hearing information:


      a. Type requested:
         (   ) Records review             ( X ) Hearing

      b. Type Held:
         (   )Records review              ( X ) Hearing
                                          (   ) Tender Offer

      c. Review/hearing location and date:  Washington, DC on 13 September
2004.

      d. Appearance by:
         Applicant                 ( X ) Yes   (   ) No
         Counsel                   ( X ) Yes   (   ) No

      e.  Applicant testified:     ( X ) Yes   (   ) No

      f.  Counsel presentation:    ( X ) Yes   (   ) No

      g.  Witness(es) testified:   (   ) Yes   ( X ) No

2.  Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing:  one (1) document.
                        PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS

1.  a.  Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity:

          ( X )  Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A
              of this case report and directive.
          (   )  Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as
              follows:
          (   )  Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as
              follows:

      b.  Request:  ( X ) Recharacterization     (   ) Change of Reason


2.  Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on
issues of propriety and/or equity:

      a.  Propriety:   The applicant has not submitted an issue of
                   propriety and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an
                   issue of propriety to change the discharge.

      b.  Equity:      The parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to
                   the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI,
                   Paragraph 1, above.

        (1)  The issue is rejected.  The Board carefully examined the
applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review
and heard his testimony.  There was a full consideration of all faithful
and honorable service as well as the infractions of discipline, the extent
thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses.  The Board noted the
applicant contentions and his supporting documents; however, did not find
said contentions sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the
discharge under the review.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was
charged with the commission of offenses punishable under the Uniform Code
of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  The Board noted,
after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily, and 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 Board was satisfied that all
requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant
were fully protected throughout the separation process.  It 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.  Further, a change to the RE Code does
not fall within the purview of this Board.  The Board noted that at the
time of separation the applicant was properly assigned an RE Code of “4.”
RE Code “4” means the applicant was discharged with a disqualification that
cannot be waived and is not eligible for reenlistment.  The Board, being
convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service
were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.

3.  Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s):  NONE

                           PART VII - BOARD ACTION
                   SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote

1.    Board conclusion(s):

      The discharge was:

      ( X ) Proper.
      (   ) Improper as to characterization.  Change characterization to
                                               .
      (   ) Improper as to reason.  Change reason to
                                   under                      .

      ( X ) Equitable.
      (   ) Inequitable as to characterization.  Change characterization to
                                         .
      (   ) Inequitable as to reason.  Change reason to
                                 
            under                                 .
      (   ) Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for
           separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should
           be changed to                      under
                                   .

2.  Voting record:      Change   No Change
                  Reason       0         5
    Characterization       1         4

        The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in
Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address
below.  The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right
corner of this document.

                  Department of the Army Review Boards Agency
                  ATTN:  Promulgation Team
                  1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor
                  Arlington, VA  22202-4508



3.  Minority views:  NONE
                           PART VII - BOARD ACTION
                 SECTION B - Verification and Authentication

Case report reviewed and verified

                          
MR. RON WILLIAMS
Case Reviewing Official

                     PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
                            SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

                                    NONE

                          SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


ROBERT L. HOUSE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
   Review Board

Official:




MARY E. SHAW
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder

EXHIBITS:
A - Application for review of discharge                  C - Other
B - Material submitted by applicant

INDEX RECORD:

AR Number:  2004101244                    INDEX NUMBERS:  A9217
Date of Review:  040913                                   A0100
Character of Service:  UD
Date of Discharge:  010615
Authority:  AR 635-200 C10
Reason:  A7000
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation:  NC 4-1 A













                           PART IX - VOTING RECORD

    Name                                   Reason          Characterization
                                           CHANGE   NC     HON  UHC   NC
UNCHAR

    1.      Mbr          X                 X       

    2.      Mbr          X            X            

    3.      Mbr          X                 X       

    4.      Mbr          X                 X       

    5.      PO           X                 X