Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2011/03/01 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: The applicant states: "The facts in the case presented previously were unfounded and the charges I have admitted to during were Article 15 issues only. I have had 25 years of service with no disciplinary issues."
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: NIF
Discharge Received: Date: 101124 Chapter: 3-13 AR: 600-8-24
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: DFS Unit/Location: HHC, 199th BSB
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 42
Current ENL Date: 090726/OAD Current ENL Term: NIF Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 03 Mos, 29 Days ?????
Total Service: 25 Yrs, 04 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-850725-891211/HD
USARCG-891212-900201/NA
ARNG-900202-000708/HD
ARNG-000709-040606/NA
OAD-040607-051226/HD
ARNG-051227-060104/NA
OAD-060105-060315/HD
ARNG-060316-080930/NA
OAD-081001-090725/HD
(Concurrent Service)
Highest Grade: O3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 13A/Field Artillery GT: NA EDU: NIF Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Kuwait/Iraq (041112-051115)
Decorations/Awards: BSM, MSM, AAM, AGCM, ARCAM-5, NDSM-2, SWASM-w/BS, GWOTSM, ICM-w/CS, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-2, CAB
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: Andersonville, TN
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 22 July 10, the applicant was charged with on divers occasions of conspiring with a First Lieutenant and Sergeant First Class between (091001 and 100530) to commit an offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) of larceny of Iraqi Dinar of a value of over $500.00; violating a lawful general order between (091225 and 100102) by wrongfully possessing and consuming alcohol; violating a lawful general order between (100507 and 100607) by wrongfully possessing pornography; divers occasions between (091101 and 100331) of violating a lawful regulation by maintaining an inappropriate relationship with Specialist B.K., divers occasions between (100101 and 100529) of violating a lawful regulation by maintaining an inappropriate relationship with Specialist A.N., divers occasions between (091225 and 100102) of violating a lawful regulation by maintaining an inappropriate relationship with Specialist D.G., derelict in the performance of his duties (100301 and 100525); being found drunk on duty (100320); engaging in sexual contact with Specialist D.H. by grabbing her hips from behind and pulling her into his crotch area between (100425 and 100502); engaging in sexual contact with Specialist D.H. by grabbing her buttocks between (090729 and 090909); on divers occasions between (091130 and 100530) wrongfully appropriating Field Ordering Officer funds of value more than $500.00 dollars, the property of the US Army; wrongfully grabbing the arm of Specialist D.H. between (100425 and 100502); wrongfully straddling a female in his office between (100101 and 100131); wrongfully endeavor to impede an Army Regulation 15-6 investigation by directing a First Lieutenant to remove and destroy a bottle of Jack Daniels and a water purifier between (100510 and 100527); wrongfully soliciting a Specialist D.G. to disobey a lawful general order between (091225 and 100102) by consuming alcohol; wrongfully soliciting a Specialist A.N. to disobey a lawful general order between (100101 and 100529) by consuming alcohol; and on divers occasions wrongfully having sexual intercourse with Specialist A.N. a woman not his wife between (100101 and 100529).
On 6 October 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily tendered his resignation from the Army in writing, under the provisions of Chapter 3, AR 600-8-24, for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by a general court-martial or a board of officers. The applicant indicated 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 veterans benefits. The chain of command recommended approval of the resignation for the good of the Service with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
On 20 October 2010, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.
b. Legal Basis for Separation:
Army regulation 600-8-24 prescribes the policies and procedures governing the transfer and discharge of Army officer personnel. Chapter 3, paragraph 3-13 outlines the rules for processing requests for resignation for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by a general court-martial.
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:
After a careful review of all the applicants military records during the term of service under review and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.
The evidence of record shows that the applicant was charged with the commission of offenses punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge. The applicant voluntarily requested resignation in lieu of trial by general court-martial under the provisions of Chapter 3, AR 600-8-24. The appropriate authority approved the applicant's request and issuance of an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service.
The applicant contends that the facts in the case presented against him were unfounded and that he had 25 years of service with no disciplinary issues. The analyst noted the applicant's contentions; however, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that the facts in his case were unfounded.
Furthermore, the analyst acknowledges the applicants in-service accomplishments and considered the quality of his service during the initial portion of the period under review. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge.
Further, the analyst concluded that the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Having examined all the circumstances, the analyst determined that the applicants numerous incidents of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicants service below that meriting a fully honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge.
In view of the foregoing, 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: 18 November 2011 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: None
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149, Fax Cover Letter from the office of Senator [ redacted ], Document from the applicant's discharge packet to include award certificates, recommendations, and evaluation reports (70 pages), and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review.
VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the term of service under review and considering the analysts 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 2 No change 3
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: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA
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 AR20110004206
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 4 of 4 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110019009
Applicant Name: ????? If my command had treated me more as a "troubled" Soldier and less as a "Problem" Soldier I would not have gotten to GUHC. On 3 August 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110020722
The applicant's chain of command documentation recommending approval of the applicant's resignation with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge is not contained in the available record and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicants military records during the term of service under review, the issues and documents submitted with the application,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110020063
Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that after the Article 32 investigation she started to fall apart and finally decided to receive counseling. On 7 February 2011, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100015762
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of the applicants military records during the term of service under review and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The appropriate authority approved the applicant's request and issuance of a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service. However, the applicant was separated under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110020063
Applicant Name: ????? On 7 February 2011, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149 dated 15 August 2011, in lieu of a DD Form 293, counsel's memorandum with enclosures including the applicant's Case Separation Files dated 15 August 2011, self authored statement undated.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110022264
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant contends, the following through counsel : Issue 1: The applicant is requesting a review of his Characterization of Service based on the assertion that his current characterization of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions is inequitable. On 8 August 2011, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) reviewed the recommendation of the Army Ad-Hoc Review Board and directed the applicants discharge with a...
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120001178
Applicant Name: ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with an general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 1 October 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100007957
Applicant Name: ????? The applicant was discharged from the Army with a Bad Conduct Discharge and reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. After a thorough review of the applicants record and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommends to the Board to deny clemency.
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100012318
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant. Chapter 3, Section IV, establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20100029703
Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2010/12/08 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.