Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY1998 | 1998012849
Original file (1998012849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
PART II - APPLICATION DATA

(Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy)

1. Character of Discharge: UOHC

2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 920116

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 10, AR 635-200

          b. Reason: For the Good of the Service-In Lieu of Court-Martial
4. Prior review(s): Records/981007


PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

 1.       Service data: 2. Awards and decorations:
                            NDSM
a. Period entered for: 4 Years ASR
b. Entry date: 890216
c. Age: 17 Years DOB: 711001
d. Educational level: GED
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 118 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E3
1 Year 2 Months 19 Days

4. Performance evaluations:
NONE

PART III - SERVICE HISTORY
SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued

5. Periods of unauthorized absence:

Status Inclusive dates
         AWOL 900222-900320; 900330-911112

         Mil conf

         Civil conf

         Other


6. Nonjudicial punishment: NONE
         Date     Offense(s)
        


7. Court-Martial data: NONE
         a. SCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

        
         b. SPCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

         c. GCM: 
                  Date Offense(s)


8.       Remarks: NONE
SECTION B - Prior Service Data
NONE

Other discharge(s):

          Service   From      To        Type Discharge





PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l. Facts and Circumstances:

         a. The evidence of record shows that on 25 November 1991, a court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for two specifications of being AWOL: the first period from 22 February to 21 March 1990; and the second period from 30 March 1990 to 13 November 1991. On 25 November 1991, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter l0, AR 635-200 for the good of the Service-in lieu of court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense. Further, the applicant stated that he understood that he could receive an under other than honorable conditions (UOHC) discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits. The applicant did not submit a statement on his own behalf. The unit commander and intermediate commander recommended approval of an UOHC discharge. On 3 December 1991, the separation authority approved the discharge with an UOHC discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.

         b. On 16 January 1992, the applicant was discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge, under the provisions of Chapter l0, AR 635-200, for the good of the Service-in lieu of court-martial. At the time of discharge, the applicant had 1 year, 2 months, and 19 days on his current enlistment and
619 days lost time.
         c. The applicant’s record shows that he completed just over a year of service and the highest rank he attained while on active duty was private first class/E-3. There are no documented acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition. The evidence of record clearly shows that a court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for two specifications of AWOL totaling 619 days of time lost, and that, after consulting counsel, he voluntarily requested an administrative separation in order to avoid prosecution and the punitive discharge he may have received.

2. Legal/Regulatory Basis or Separation Action : Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter l0 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 requests 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 discharge is authorized, a discharge UOHC is normally considered appropriate.

SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS


 1. Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel.
As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293.
2. Exhibit(s) submitted:

         A-1: DD Form 293, dated 990123.
         A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE
         B-l: Other Documents: NONE

PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED)



SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion


Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor ( ) Legal Advisor



 a. Medical prehearing comments (if applicable):

b. Legal prehearing comments (if applicable):
PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING

SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits

1. Review/hearing information:

         a. Type requested:
         ( ) Records review ( X ) Hearing

         b. Type Held:
         ( )Records review ( X ) Hearing Examiner
         ( ) Tender Offer

         c. Review/hearing location and date:
         Video Site: Chicago, Illinois on 11 June 1999.
         Board Site: Washington D.C. on 17 June 1999.
         

         d. Appearance by:
          Applicant ( X ) Yes ( ) No
          Counsel ( ) Yes ( X ) No

          e. Applicant testified: ( X ) Yes ( ) No
        
         f. Counsel presentation: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
         g. Witness(es) testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
2. Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing:

PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS

1. a. Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity:

          ( X )   Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A of this case report and directive.
         ( )     Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as follows:
         ( )     Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as follows:
         b. Request: ( X ) Recharacterization ( ) Change of Reason


2. Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on issues of propriety and/or equity:


          a. Propriety:    The applicant has not submitted an issue of propriety and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an issue of propriety to change the discharge.
         b. Equity:       The applicant has not submitted an issue of equity and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an issue of equity to change the discharge. The major factors upon which the discharge was based are set forth in Parts III and IV of this decisional document.

3. Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s): NONE
PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote

1.       Board conclusion(s):

         The discharge was:

          ( X )    Proper.
         ( )      Improper as to characterization. Change characterization to                                      .
         ( )      Improper as to reason. Change reason to                         under                       .

         ( X )    Equitable.
         ( )      Inequitable as to characterization. Change characterization to                                .
         ( )      Inequitable as to reason. Change reason to                       
                  under                                  .
         ( )      Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should be changed to                      under                          .
2. Voting record: Change No Change
         Reason 0 5
Characterization 0 5

         The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address below. The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right corner of this document.

Department of the Army Review Boards Agency
ATTN: Promulgation Team
1941 Jefferson Davis Highway, 2nd Floor
Arlington, VA 22202-4508



3. Minority views: NONE

PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION B - Verification and Authentication

Case report reviewed and verified       

                                 
MR. ADRIANCE
Case Reviewing Official 

PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
SECTION A - DIRECTIVE
NONE
SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


THOMAS J. ALLEN
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
Review Board

Official:




SUZANNE WALKER
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder

EXHIBITS:
A - Application for review of discharge          C - Other
B - Material submitted by applicant

INDEX RECORD:

 AR Number: 1998012849 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 990617 A9500
Character of Service: UD A0100
Date of Discharge: 920116
Authority: AR 635-200 C10
Reason: A7100
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: NC 5-0 A













PART IX - VOTING RECORD

 Name  Reason Characterization
 CHANGE NC HON UHC NC UNCHAR
1.      Mbr      X          X    
2.      Mbr      X          X    
3.      Mbr      X          X    
4.      Mbr      X          X    
5.      Mbr      X          X    

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | AR1999016028

    Original file (AR1999016028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board noted the contentions of the applicant and his counsel, that due to the circumstances of the case the UOHC discharge was too harsh; and that based on the applicant’s overall record of service the UOHC discharge was inequitable. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025029

    Original file (1999025029.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter l0 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 also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. PART VII -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999027236

    Original file (1999027236.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter l0 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 also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025368

    Original file (1999025368.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter l0 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 also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | AR1999026018

    Original file (AR1999026018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter l0 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 also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. AR Number:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001052173

    Original file (2001052173.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 12 May 1993, the applicant was discharged. It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999017750

    Original file (1999017750.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data NONEOther discharge(s): ServiceFromToType Discharge PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEWSECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances:a. Chapter l0 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. A-2: Counsel Issues:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1998 | 1998012895

    Original file (1998012895.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Chapter l0 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. A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED) The Board determined that the characterization of service discharge was inequitable because the quality of the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999027214

    Original file (1999027214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. ADRIANCE Case Reviewing Official PART...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999029168

    Original file (1999029168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. ADRIANCE Case Reviewing Official PART...