Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025320
Original file (1999025320.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): 910117

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): NONE


PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

 1.       Service data: 2. Awards and decorations:
                            ASR
a. Period entered for: 4 Years
b. Entry date: 861028
c. Age: 21 Years DOB: 650701
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: NIF 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E4
3 Years 0 Months 17 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 890906-901108

         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 20 November 1990, a court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from 6 September 1989 to 9 November 1990. On 20 November 1990, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter l0, 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 stated that she understood that she 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 elected not to submit a statement in her own behalf. The unit commander recommended approval of the applicant’s request with a UOHC discharge. On 7 January 1991, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request and directed that the applicant receive a UOHC discharge, and that she be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.

         b. On 17 January 1991, the applicant was discharged with a UOHC discharge. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 3 years and 11 days of active military service and had accrued 429 days of time lost due to AWOL.

         c. The applicant’s record shows that she completed just over 3 years of service and that the highest rank she attained while on active duty was specialist/E-4. The evidence of record shows that a court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for a 429 day period of AWOL, and that she voluntarily requested an administrative separation in order to avoid prosecution and the punitive discharge which may have resulted.

 2. Legal/Regulatory Basis for 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 990323, with two (2) enclosure(s).
         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:
         ( X ) Records review ( ) Hearing

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

         c. Review/hearing location and date: Washington D.C. on 26 May 1999.

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

          e. Applicant testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) 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 parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI, Paragraph 1, above.

 (1) The issue is rejected. The Board noted the applicant’s contention, as outlined in her enclosed statement to the Board, that, in effect her post service accomplishments warrant relief, and that her misconduct was the result of her being unable to deal with her family problems after being denied a compassionate reassignment. However, the Board determined that even if these contentions are true, the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. 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 Board noted that, after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated offense under the UCMJ. The Board 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 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. 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 1 4

         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: 1999025320 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 990526 A9221
Character of Service: UD A0100
Date of Discharge: 910117
Authority: AR 635-200 C10
Reason: A7100
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: NC 4-1 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.      PO      X          X    





Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000039839

    Original file (2000039839.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Evidence of record shows that on 31 December 1990, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 8 AR 635-200, by reason of inability to perform prescribed duties due to parenthood, with a general discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, declined a separation medical examination and did not submit a statement in her own behalf. On 17 January 1991, the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999029054

    Original file (1999029054.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:THOMAS J. ALLEN Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board AR Number: 1999029054...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999026457

    Original file (1999026457.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. AR Number: 1999026457 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217 Date of Review: 990623 A9407 Character of Service: UD A0100 Date of Discharge: 980717 Authority: AR...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999022263

    Original file (1999022263.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 | 1999026075

    Original file (1999026075.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. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MRS. WADE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:THOMAS J. ALLEN Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999026079

    Original file (1999026079.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 | CY1999 | 1999015469

    Original file (1999015469.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. AR Number: 1999015469 INDEX NUMBERS: A9235 Date of Review: 990602 A9217 Character of Service: UD A9307 Date of Discharge: 971121 A0100 Authority:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999015385

    Original file (1999015385.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED) The Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable because the quality of the applicant's service did not warrant the granting of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. ( X ) Characterization of discharge be changed to General, Under Honorable Conditions.SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:THOMAS J. ALLEN Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999026177

    Original file (1999026177.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Prior review(s): NONE PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review 1. 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. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999027783

    Original file (1999027783.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. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B -...