Application Receipt Date: 070808

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: 060920
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu Of Trial By Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: A Company, 1st Battalion, 14th Infantry, 25 Infantry
Division, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii 96857

Time Lost: AWOL-2 days, from (060710-060711), apprehended by his unit, AWOL-
30 days, from (060729-060818, surrendered to his unit, and again AWOL-5
days, from 060901-060905), apprehended by his unit.  The applicant was AWOL
for a total of 37 days.  The applicant was placed in pre-trial confinement
from (060906-060912).

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060330-Wrongfully used cocaine,
between on or about (060127) and (060202), (Field Grade).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  780402
Current ENL Date: 050207    Current ENL Term: 4 Years       
Current ENL Service: 01  Yrs, 06 Mos, 06 Days      
Total Service:  03 Yrs, 06 Mos, 08 Days Item 12c on DD Form 214, net active
service this period is incorrect, should read 03 Yrs, 06 Mos, 08 Days.
Previous Discharges: RA-030206-05026/HD
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No
MOS: 11B10 Infantryman   GT: 63   EDU: HS Transcript   Overseas: Hawaii
Combat: Afghanistan (040324-050323)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR (2), CIB
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 12 September 2006, the applicant
was charged with AWOL x 3, from 10 July 2006 until 12 July 2006; 29 July
2006 until 19 August 2006; 1 September 2006 until 6 September 2006; and
wrongfully used cocaine on or between 6 July 2006 and 12 July 2006.  On 12
September 2006, 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
submitted a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander recommended
approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The senior
intermediate commander recommended approval of an under other than
honorable conditions discharge.  On 13 September 2006, 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 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.  The applicant consulted with defense counsel,
and voluntarily in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of
trial by courts-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.  Furthermore, the record does not support
the applicant’s contention that he suffers from Post Traumatic Stress
symptoms and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant,
that his discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Therefore, 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: 3 October 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 1    No change 4   - 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 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: 12 October 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder