Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2011/11/08 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: The applicant states, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 34 months of service with no other adverse actions.
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: NIF Date: NIF
Discharge Received: Date: 011113 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: B Battery, 2/82 Field Artilley, Fort Hood, OK
Time Lost: AWOL for 39 days (001202-010109), surrendered. Total lost time is 39 days
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: 20
Current ENL Date: 990119 Current ENL Term: 04 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 08 Mos, 16 Days ?????
Total Service: 02 Yrs, 08 Mos, 16 Days Includes 307 days of excess leave (010111-011113)
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 13B10 Cannon Crewmember GT: 111 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed by the applicant
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The applicants record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicants signature.
The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS (i.e., in lieu of trial by court-martial) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "4."
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 individuals 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 applicants available 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 only pertinent evidence available for review regarding the applicant's discharge is the DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, which was not authenticated by the applicant. The DD Form 214 shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In connection with such a discharge, the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.
Procedurally, the applicant was required to consult with defense counsel and to voluntarily, and in writing, request 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. In the absence of information to the contrary, 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. It also noted the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant would have been aware of it prior to requesting discharge.
The applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 34 months of service with no other adverse actions. The analyst noted that even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The analyst having examined the available document and determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service.
Furthermore, the analyst is unable to determine whether his contentions have merit because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will still be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record. The application to appear before this Board must be received prior to the 15th year anniversary of the applicants discharge.
Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that it appears 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 May 2012 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: yes [redacted]
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 and DD Form 214
VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment 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
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0 No change 5
Reason - Change 0 No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
X. Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA
XI. Certification Signature
Approval Authority:
EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board
BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
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 AR20110022446
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 3 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010729
Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: NIF Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 990916 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: B Co, 1-501st IN Bn (ABN), Fort Richardson, AK Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. The DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070014569
Applicant Name: ????? His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100016821
Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. 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. Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 25 May 2010.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080006730
The DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS (i.e., for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial), with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3." Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070018437
Applicant Name: ????? 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. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100014177
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. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100008622
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 9 years and 1 month of service with no other adverse action. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Board Discussion, Determination, and...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090012101
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: Applicant states, in effect his misconduct was an isolated incident. The DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080002916
Applicant Name: ????? The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of her service, brings discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010886
Applicant Name: ????? On 18 January 2007, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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.