Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999029132
Original file (1999029132.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): 980804

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 10, AR 635-200

         b. Reason: In Lieu of Trial by 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:
                           NONE
a. Period entered for: 3 Years
b. Entry date: 970305
c. Age: 24 Years DOB: 730303
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
         GT: 103 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E1
0 Years 7 Months 23 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 970526-980302;

         Mil conf 0

         Civil conf 0

         Other 0


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 6 March 1998, a court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ, for being AWOL from 26 May 1997 to 3 March 1998. On 6 March 1998 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 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 unit commander recommended approval of the applicant’s request and recommended a UOHC discharge. On 17 June 1998, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for separation and directed that he receive a UOHC discharge, and that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.

         b. On 4 August 1998, the applicant was separated with a UOHC discharge. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 7 months and 23 days of credible military service and had accrued 281 days lost time due to AWOL.

         c. The applicant’s record shows that he completed just 7 months and 23 days of credible service and never advanced beyond the rank of private/E-1 while he was on active duty. There are no documented acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition contained in the record. However, the evidence of record shows that a court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for a 281 day period of AWOL. After consulting counsel, and being advised of the impact of his action, the applicant 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 990707, with three (3) 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, DC on 4 August 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 parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI, Paragraph 1, above.

(2) The issue is rejected. The Board noted the applicant’s contention that, in effect, his discharge was improper because he was a model soldier and reported when told to do so; and that he was promised sniper school and airborne training which turned out to be a lie. However, after carefully reviewing the applicant’s record of service for the period of enlistment under review, the Board determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate. The Board further concluded that even if the applicant’s issues were true, he had many other legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.


         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 that, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because at the time of his discharge he had completed less than 180 days of active duty and requested an entry level discharge. However, 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 offenses 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. Finally, the Board considered the applicant’s entire record of service for the period under review. 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 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: 1999029132 INDEX NUMBERS: A0101
Date of Review: 990804 A9217
Character of Service: UD A9411
Date of Discharge: 980804 A9329
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.      PO      X          X    





Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 99032301

    Original file (99032301.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 MRS. WADE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004100218

    Original file (AR2004100218.doc) 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. Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel. Remarks: This action entails a restoration of the applicant’s grade to “PFC/E-3.” SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: ROBERT L....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999029187

    Original file (1999029187.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 | CY2000 | 2000044013

    Original file (2000044013.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the Board found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999026539

    Original file (1999026539.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 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 Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application for...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002079359

    Original file (2002079359.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    SECTION B - Prior Service Data Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge RA 940824 970726 Honorable PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION SECTION A - DIRECTIVE TO: ARBA Support Division-St Louis Date: 17 January 2003 The Army...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | AR1999029377

    Original file (AR1999029377.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 99027466

    Original file (99027466.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. RON WILLIAMS Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B -...

  • 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 | 1999025860

    Original file (1999025860.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: 1999025860 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217 Date of Review: 990602 A9307 Character of Service: UD A9323 Date of Discharge: 980720 A0100 Authority:...