Application Receipt Date: 061101 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: 040720 Discharge Received: Date: 041105 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu Of Trial By Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Company E 82nd Chemical Bn 3rd Chemical Bde Fort Leonard Wood, MO 65473 Time Lost: AWOL-71 days (040411-040620) surrendered to military authorities at Fort Sill, OK. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 821222 Current ENL Date: 040205 Current ENL Term: 3 Years applicant placed on excess leave for 134 days (040625-041105). Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 06 Mos, 20 Days ????? Total Service: 00 Yrs, 06 Mos, 20 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: 100 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant has been employed by the Georgia Department Of Corrections as a corrections officer since 1 March 2006. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 24 June 2004, the applicant was charged with AWOL from (040411-040620). On 25 June 2004, 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. The unit commander recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 7 October 2004, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 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 careful review of all the applicant's military records for the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents she submitted, the analyst recommend that relief in this case 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 punitive charge. 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 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: 070205 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: Yes Witnesses/Observers: No Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted twenty one pages of documents in support of her personal appearance hearing. 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 No change (Character) Change No change (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 her testimony, and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh and as a result it is now inequitable. The Board found that the circumstances surrounding the discharge and the applicant's post service accomplishments mitigated the discrediting entry in her service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to uncharacterized. However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails a restoration of grade to PV2/E2. 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: PV2/E2 XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 070209 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060015442 Applicant Name: Ms. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 5 pages