| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member | |
| Ms. Paula Mokulis | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That her records be corrected to show the charges of wrongful possession, use, and distribution of a controlled substance be removed from her records.
APPLICANT STATES: That a background check from a prospective employer turned up the information that she had been under investigation and suspected of wrongful possession, use, and distribution of a controlled substance. Those charges were dismissed when she was discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. She was only under suspicion, not guilty, and this should not be on her record.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
She enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 August 1995. She completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91B (Medical Specialist). She was then assigned for training in MOS 91C (Practical Nurse).
On 17 January 1997, the applicant made a sworn statement to a Criminal Investigation Command (CID) investigator that she had attended a “Rave” party on 7 or 14 December 1996 where she bought and ingested a “hit” of LSD. On 10 January 1997, while she was on Unit Charge of Quarters duty, she was given two ”hits” of LSD and immediately ingested the LSD.
On 30 January 1997, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant charging her with dereliction in the performance of her duties in that she failed to remain in a capacity to properly perform her duties and with two specifications of wrongful use of LSD.
On 5 February 1997, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. She was advised of the implications that were attached to it. By submitting the request for discharge, she acknowledged that she understood the elements of the offenses charged and was guilty of one or more of the charges against her or of lesser included offenses therein contained which also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.
The appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant receive a general under honorable conditions discharge.
On 9 April 1997, the applicant was discharged with a general under honorable conditions discharge, in pay grade E-3, under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200, chapter 10, discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. She had completed 1 year, 8 months, and 7 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.
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 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.
Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) 5505.7, 14 May 1992, Titling and Indexing of Subjects of Criminal Investigations in the Department of Defense, states that titling ensures investigators can retrieve information in an ROI of suspected criminal activity at some future time for law enforcement and security purposes. Titling or indexing alone does not denote any degree of guilt or innocence. The criteria for titling, simply stated, is if there is reason to investigate, the subject of the investigation should be titled.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
2. The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.
3. The applicant’s prospective employer most likely obtained the information concerning the investigation from the CID Report of Investigation. The charges may have been dismissed by action of the convening authority; however, she was properly titled in the Report of Investigation. In addition, by requesting a chapter 10 discharge she acknowledged that she understood the elements of the offenses charged and was guilty of one or more of the charges against her.
4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__rjw___ __kwl___ __pm____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001057607 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010920 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 134.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004685
On 23 January 1998, the separation authority disapproved the applicant's request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Conrad V. Meyer _____________________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070004685 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20070821 TYPE...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002726
The applicant's record contains a DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) which shows he was charged with conspiring with PVT ED and PVT CM between 20 and 27 February 1988 by driving to Austin, TX, to purchase LSD with the intent to distribute. The applicant's chain of command recommended approval of his request for discharge for the good of the service and his discharge UOTHC. The characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally UOTHC and the evidence shows the applicant was aware of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015450
Finally, after Officer Basic Course graduation without him and after witness testimonial was taken, they called him to charge him for rape, sodomy, and adultery. c. He went to the Article 32 proceedings and after the final report, the investigating officer recommended dropping the charge of rape. Paragraph 3-13, rules for processing resignation for the good of the Service in lieu of general court-martial, states an officer may submit a resignation for the good of the Service (RFGOS) in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002792
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 September 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110002792 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states the Board's original decision did not give adequate consideration to all of the facts concerning his case, including that: * he was serving in pay grade E-2 when he got to Germany and was advanced to pay grade E-3 based on completion of a special assignment along the border * he was approached by a Criminal Investigation Division (CID) agent who...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130014667
IN THE CASE OF: Ms. BOARD DATE: 9 May 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20130014667 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the examiners Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. Discharge Received: Under Other Than...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010749
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 14 August 2009, the ADRB denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of her discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008741
It also shows she was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, with her service characterized as under other than honorable conditions. Based on her record of indiscipline and in view of the fact that she voluntarily requested to be discharged in order to avoid a trial by court-martial that could have resulted in a punitive discharge, her overall record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019112
The applicant requests: * An upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge * Restoration of his rank/pay grade to specialist (SPC)/E-4 * Correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show completion of the 91C course * A personal hearing 2. The applicant provides: * DD Form 214 ending on 19 March 1997 * DA Form 458 (Charge Sheet) * DA Form 4856 (General Counseling Form) * Statement from a sergeant * Printout regarding variable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018290
Counsel states he feels the applicant's uncharacterized discharged was not fair and that she was not given a proper discharge for her time serving her country. It also shows she was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 625-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial with her service characterized as "uncharacterized." After a few days, she was asked by the CID to help in an area they needed help.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04440-99
In your application you are requesting that you not be required to repay the cost of your education at the USNA. further administrative consideration of your case by submitting your resignation, and you admitted guilt in your resignation letter. There is no evidence in the record, and you have However, you precluded any It is Concerning the decision to waive recoupment of educational costs for Mr. 0 in 1996 despite his use of LSD, the Board determined that this waiver action resulted from...