Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 20071116	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the Applicant.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 030528   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: C Co, 703d MSB DSC, Ft Stewart, GA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 000916, Drunken driving and Traffic accident with damages to private property on 000812; reduction to E1, extra duty for 45 days, and restriction for 45 days, (FG).

020930, failed to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty X 2 (020822 & 020823); with intent to deceive an NCO, made a false official statement (020823); wrongful use of cocaine between (020824-020827); reduction to E1, forfeiture of $552 per month X 2 months, 45 days extra duty and 45 days restriction, (FG).

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None 

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  33
Current ENL Date: 991117    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  0
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 6Mos, 12Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 6Mos, 12Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 91B Medical Specialist   GT: 94   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany/Kosovo   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, ASR, OSR, NATOM  

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
            The evidence of record shows that on 9 April 2003, the applicant was charged with intent to deceive, signing an official record that was totally false (030123), wrongful using cocaine between (030131 and 030203), and feigning injury and submitting a false profile bearing the forged signature of a Doctor between (030102 and 030131).  On 29 April 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 she understood that she 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 her own behalf.  On 8 May 2003, the Staff Judge Advocate indicated in his recommendation that the applicant's chain of command recommended the approval of the request for the Chapter 10 discharge.  On 8 May 2003, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 
       
       This applicant's record contains a Military Police Report, dated 31 January 2003 and a CID report, dated 24 March 2003.  Additionally, this applicant's record contains a GOMOR, dated 16 September 2000 for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, causing a traffic accident and fleeing the scene of the accident.

       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, and the issue she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was charged with the commission of an offenses 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.  The analyst noted that 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.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. The analyst noted the applicant's issue, however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  An RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 20081001         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: None

VIII.  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.  
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
Issue a new DD Form 214  					         Colonel, U.S. Army
Change Characterization to: 			         President, Army Discharge Review Board 
Change Reason to:  
Other: NA										
RE Code: 									 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070016533
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages