Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2011/09/01 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he wants to pursue a career in law enforcement and knows that the conditions and situation which led to his discharge were a direct result of his own actions. He served his country and successfully carried out two deployments. He has learned from his mistakes and would like the opportunity to carry out the full potential as a Soldier, humanitarian, and guardian of this country. He believes that his leadership chain did not react to his personal family issues that resulted in his demise as a Soldier. He is currently enrolled as a full time student at the University of Mary Hardin Baylor, majoring in Criminal Justice and Political Science so that he can enhance his marketability as a future Law Enforcement Official. 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: 090922 Discharge Received: Date: 091014 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: 578th Forward Support Company, 1st Battalion, 14th Field Artillery, 214th Fires Brigade, Fort Sill, OK Time Lost: AWOL x 1 (080815-090719) for 308 days. The applicant was apprehended by the civilian authorities at Killeen, TX and was transferred to 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: 22 Current ENL Date: 060202 Current ENL Term: 3 Years The applicant required a moral waiver at the time of enlistment, which was approved on (060112) Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 9 Mos, 8 Days ????? Total Service: 5 Yrs, 4 Mos, 3 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR 030319-031214/NA ADT 031215-050318/HD USAR 050319-060201/NA Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 91D10 Power Generation Equip GT: 96 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Kuwait (040217-050216) & Iraq (061004-071004) Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, AFRMDLw/ M device, ASR, MUC V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant stated in his issue that he is currently enrolled as a full time student at the University of Mary Hardin Baylor, majoring in Criminal Justice and Political Science. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 15 September 2009,, the applicant was charged with AWOL from (080815-090719) and wrongfully using marijuana between on or about (080623-080723). On 22 September 2009, 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 not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander and intermediate commander's recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 1 October 2009, 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, 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, the issue and documents 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 he served his country and successfully carried out two deployments and he has learned from his mistakes and would like the opportunity to carry out the full potential as a Soldier, humanitarian, and guardian of this country. The analyst considered the applicant’s quality of service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge. The applicant further contends that his leadership chain did not react to his personal family issues that resulted in his demise as a Soldier. While the applicant may believe his personal family issues at home was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief from his issues through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other resources available to all Soldiers. Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct. The analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Additionally, the analyst congratulates the applicant on his work achievements since departing the Army. However, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Furthermore, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the analyst found that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, re-entry code as “3.” In view of the foregoing, the analyst recommends to the Board that an administrative change be made to block 27, reentry code to read “4,” as it was approved by the separation authority. Except for the foregoing modification, 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: 7 February 2012 Location: Dallas, TX Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: Yes. Witnesses/Observers: Ms. Serena Hall/Fiance Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 26 September 2011, copy of his transcript from the University of Mary Hardin-Baylor for the 2011-2012 Academic Year Fall Semester and a copy of his assumed name of business Rutledge Investigations dated 17 August 2011 from the Bell County Treasurer, Killeen, TX. VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst's recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, reentry code as “3.” In view of the error, the Board voted to administratively change block 27, reentry code to “4," as it was approved by the separation authority. 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: The Board voted to administratively change block 27, reentry code to “4" as annotated below. RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change Official: BONITA E. TROTMAN Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder 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 AR20110018191 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 4 pages