Application Receipt Date: 060706 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: 021127 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu Of Trial By Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: HHD 17th Corps Support Battalion Schofield Barracks, HI 96857 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: 791124 Current ENL Date: 001115 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 00 Mos, 13 Days ????? Total Service: 02 Yrs, 00 Mos, 13 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 63W10 Wheel Vehicle Repairer GT: 105 EDU: GED Cert Overseas: Hawaii Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR, OSR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: ????? VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 10 September 2002, the applicant was charged with driving recklessly, driving the wrong way on a one-way street, disregarding a stop sign, fleeing to elude, and by failing to perform a traffic accident duty upon striking an unattended vehicle, (020824), willfully and wrongfully, destroy by driving a motor vehicle into a portable light set, a value of over $500.00, military property of the United States, (020824), willfully and wrongfully, destroy by driving a motor vehicle into a stop sign, of a value of about $101.00, military property of the United States, (020824), willfully and wrongfully damage by driving a 1995 Ford Ranger owned by another person and crashing it into multiple objects, the amount of said damage being over $500.00, the property of another Soldier, (020824), willfully and wrongfully damage by crashing a motor vehicle into a 1997 Ford Expedition, the amount of said damage being over $500.00, the property of another Soldier, (020824), willfully and wrongfully damage by crashing a motor vehicle into a 1992 Mercedes 190E, the amount of said damage being over $500.00, the property of another Soldier, (020824), operate a truck, while alcohol concentration in breath was .10 grams or more per 210 liters of breath as shown by chemical analysis. The applicant's documentation indicating she consulted with legal counsel and her voluntary request for discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial are not a part of the available records and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Also, the separation authority directing the issuance of a general, under honorable conditions discharge is not part of the available records and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. The applicant received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand for driving a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol content of .202% dated 24 September 2002. 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 issue and documents she 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. Procedurally, the applicant would have 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 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. The analyst determined that 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: 6 June 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 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 and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, 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: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 21 June 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060009443 Applicant Name: Ms. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages