Application Receipt Date: 060706	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents.

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: NIF
Discharge Received:     Date: 021127   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu Of Trial By Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: HHD 17th Corps Support Battalion Schofield Barracks, HI 96857 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  791124  
Current ENL Date: 001115    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 00 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Total Service:  02  Yrs, 00 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 63W10 Wheel Vehicle Repairer   GT: 105   EDU: GED Cert   Overseas: Hawaii   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR, OSR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: ?????

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 10 September 2002, the applicant was charged with driving recklessly, driving the wrong way on a one-way street, disregarding a stop sign, fleeing to elude, and by failing to perform a traffic accident duty upon striking an unattended vehicle, (020824), willfully and wrongfully, destroy by driving a motor vehicle into a portable light set, a value of over $500.00, military property of the United States, (020824), willfully and wrongfully, destroy by driving a motor vehicle into a stop sign, of a value of about $101.00, military property of the United States, (020824), willfully and wrongfully damage by driving a 1995 Ford Ranger owned by another person and crashing it into multiple objects, the amount of said damage being over $500.00, the property of another Soldier, (020824), willfully and wrongfully damage by crashing a motor vehicle into a 1997 Ford Expedition, the amount of said damage being over $500.00, the property of another Soldier, (020824), willfully and wrongfully damage by crashing a motor vehicle into a 1992 Mercedes 190E, the amount of said damage being over $500.00, the property of another Soldier, (020824), operate a truck, while alcohol concentration in breath was .10 grams or more per 210 liters of breath as shown by chemical analysis.  The applicant's documentation indicating she consulted with legal counsel and her voluntary request for discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial are not a part of the available records and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  Also, the separation authority directing the issuance of a general, under honorable conditions discharge is not part of the available records and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.
      
      The applicant received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand for driving a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol content of .202% dated 24 September 2002.
      
       

      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, the issue and documents she submitted, the analyst recommends that relief be denied in this case.  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.  Procedurally, the applicant would have 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 UCMJ.  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 this prior to requesting discharge.  The analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 6 June 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




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, voted to deny relief.





















Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
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: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 21 June 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060009443

Applicant Name:  Ms.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages