Application Receipt Date: 060822	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: Records/031210

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: 021227   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu Of Trial By Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: 212th Mobile Surgical Hospital APO AE 09059 

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:  710405  
Current ENL Date: 020517    Current ENL Term: Indef Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 07 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Total Service:  11  Yrs, 01 Mos, 14 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: USAR-900921-910204/NA
                                      ADT-910205-910610/UNC
                                      USAR-910611-911113/NA
                                      RA-911114-970316/HD
                                      RA-970317-020516/HD
Highest Grade: E6
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 91D30 Operating Room Spec   GT: 118   EDU: 14 Years   Overseas: Korea/Germany/Macedonia/Nigeria   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: MSM, ARCOM (4), AAM (5), AGCM (3), NDSM (2), , KCM, HSM, NCOPDR w/2, NM (Yugoslavia), ASR, OSR (2), C/Ach (4), C/App (2) 
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 30 July 2002, the applicant was charged with stealing 77 digital video discs, 23 video cassette tapes, four compact discs, and three sets of earphones of a value of $2,167, the property of the Vogelweh Movie or Music Store on (020502).  However, the record is void of the applicant consulting with legal counsel and voluntarily requesting, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial, and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  In this request, the applicant would have admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense.  The applicant did not submit a statement in her own behalf.  The applicant's chain of command recommended trial by a General Court-Martial.  On 9 December 2002, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.
      
      The applicant has an Article 32 Investigation dated 31 July 2002, in her Official Military Personnel File.
      
      The applicant has a CID Report of Investigation dated 8 May 2002, in her Official Military Personnel File.
      
      The applicant has an Air Force Office Of Special Investigations/USACIDC Investigation dated 26 July 2002, in her Official Military Personnel File.
      
      
         

      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 issues and documents she submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of her faithful and honorable service, as well as her record of misconduct.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service  mitigated the discrediting entries in her service record.  However, the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable.  This action entails a restoration of grade to SSG/E6.    

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 2 July 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: Yes (redacted)

Witnesses/Observers: Mr. Federico Robinson/Spouse 

Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted one additional document in support of her personal appearance hearing. 




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 5    No change 0   - Character
		 			      Change 4    No change 1   - 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; hearing her testimony, and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge is now inequitable.  The Board does not condone the applicant's misconduct; however, found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, and her post service accomplishments mitigated the discrediting entries in her service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority.  This action entails a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to "1" and a restoration of grade to SSG/E6.  
















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: "Secretarial Authority" under provisions of Chapter 5, AR 635-200.
Other: NA
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: SSG/E6

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 11 July 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060012032

Applicant Name:  Ms.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages