Application Receipt Date: 070518	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: 060630/Records

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

Issues: See applicant's 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: 030324
Discharge Received:     Date: 030507   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu Of Trial By Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: 
Time Lost: AWOL- 226 days from ( 020724-030309) and AWOL-10 days from (010713-010722), the mode of return to military control is not in the file.  The applicant had a total of 239 days lost time. 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 010913 , Wrongfully used marijuana, between on or about (010711) and on or about (010801), (Field Grade).

010802-AWOL,reduction to PVT/E1, forfeiture of $243.00, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (010129), extra duty for 14 days, and restriction for 14 days (Company Grade).

The suspension of punishment of forfeiture of $243.00, imposed on (010802), was vacated for wrongful use of marijuana, between on or about (010711) and on or about (010801).


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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  820911  
Current ENL Date: 000615    Current ENL Term: 3 Years       
Current ENL Service: 02  Yrs, 02 Mos, 24 Days      
Total Service:  02  Yrs, 02 Mos, 24 Days      
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E2
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 19D10 Cavalry Scout   GT: 111   EDU: GED Cert   Overseas: (Unk) Item 12f, Foreign Service on DD Form 214 shows that the applicant had 07 Mos, 16 Days of foreign service.   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: Baltimore, MD 21227
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 21 March 2003, the applicant was charged with AWOL, from (020725-030310).  On 21March 2003, 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 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.  The applicant's chain of command recommended approval of his request for discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.   On 27 March 2003, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.




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 he submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his characterization of service be denied.  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.  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.  The analyst noted the applicant's issues, even though the applicant claims that his offenses were a one time mistake and isolated, the analyst concluded that the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct, expected of Soldiers in the Army. Having examined all the circumstances, the analyst determined that the applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant’s service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  An RE code of “4” can not be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  Therefore, the analyst determined that 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: 5 November 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: 

Witnesses/Observers: 

Exhibits Submitted: No




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, hearing his testimony, and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, and 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: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 13 November 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder