Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2011/02/14 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that she is a college student pursuing a career in nursing. In order to get into the program, she can't have anything with a federal offense on her background and that she is planning on going to medical school. She is doing this for her wonderful girls. 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: 071126 Discharge Received: Date: 080128 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: 120th Adjutant General Reception Battalion, Fort Jackson, SC Time Lost: AWOL x 1 from (070915-071031) for 46 days. The applicant surrendered to the military authorities at Fort Sill, OK. 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: 21 Current ENL Date: OADT/070321 Current ENL Term: ?? Years 17 weeks Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 8 Mos, 22 Days The computation includes 81 days of excess leave from (071109-080128) Total Service: 0 Yrs, 9 Mos, 2 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR 070312-070320/NA Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92G10 Food Service Oper GT: NIF EDU: GED Cert Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant stated in her issue that she is a college student pursuing a career in nursing and plans to go on to medical school. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 8 November 2007, the applicant was charged with AWOL from (070915-071031). On 9 November 2007, 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 uncharacterized discharge. On 20 December 2007, the separation authority approved the discharge with an 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, under honorable conditions 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 submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 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 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 the applicant was aware of it prior to requesting discharge. The analyst noted the applicant's issue that she is a college student pursuing a career in nursing and in order to get into the program, she can't have anything with a federal offense on her background and that she is planning on going to medical school. The analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life as stated in her application. However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, analyst found that this accomplishment did not overcome the reason for discharge and the characterization of service granted. Further, Army Regulation 635-200, provides in pertinent part, that a soldier is in entry-level status for the first 180 days of continuous active duty. The purpose of the entry-level status is to provide the soldier a probationary period. Soldiers who are found to lack the necessary motivation, adaptability, self-discipline, ability, or attitude to become productive soldiers may be expeditiously separated while in entry-level status. Army Regulation 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a soldier’s service will be uncharacterized when the separation is initiated while the soldier is in entry level status. An uncharacterized discharge is not an adverse separation. Additionally, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. Therefore, the analyst determined that 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: 9 September 2011 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 15 January 2011. 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 X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20110003214 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages