Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2007/11/30	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: On 17 Oct 06, I received a message that my pregnant fiancé was in the hospital, and the doctors were giving her medicine that was not safe for the baby. While I was in BCT in July she had gotten into a car accident and had a miscarriage. At that time I was not allowed leave, because we weren’t married yet. Since this was almost a repeat of the same deal, I had asked a Drill Sgt. for leave to go see her. As punishment for (Stupid questions) I received Fire guard and only MRE’s for two days. On 19 Oct 06 While talking to her she was crying saying that she felt that she was going to lose the baby. She then asked me to come see her. Under the stress I was going through mentally, physically and past dealing with this. I decided I would go and return to my unit afterwards. I left 19 Oct 06, She did end up having a miscarriage due to the medicine and I remained there to comfort her. I hadn’t realized there were 31 days in October. I retuned 19 Nov 06 not realizing I was 1 day over my 30 days. I was then sent to FT Sill where I was discharged. Sir or Ma’am  when I left I didn’t leave with the intent on not coming back nor deserting the army, I never wanted to dishonor myself nor my country and I’m asking for a chance to correct my action and serve my country in time of need. Im requesting that my RE CODE 4 be upgraded to at least a RE CODE 3.  My intentions are to return back to the army and no service will allow you to join with a RE CODE 4.


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: 070129
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070212   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: C Co 232nd Med Bn, Fort Sam Houston, Tx 

Time Lost: AWOL (061019-061122), 35 days, surrendered

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

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 060608    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 07Mos, 24Days includes 95 days of excess leave from (061201-070305).
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 07Mos, 24Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: PFC		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 68W Combat Medic   GT: 109   EDU: GED   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR

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 30 November 2006, the applicant was charged with AWOL (061019-061122).  On 1 December 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 did submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander recommended approval of an uncharacterized discharge.  On 12 February 2007, the separation authority approved the discharge with a uncharacterized separation of service.

       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 he 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 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.  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.  Additionally, 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 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: 17 October 2008         Location: Washington, D. C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

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			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
								         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 									 
Grade Restoration: x  No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070017725
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 3 pages