Upgrade.Vet

ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999033655

Original file (1999033655.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PART II - APPLICATION DATA

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

1. Character of Discharge: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions

2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 920323

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/950724

PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

1.       Service data: 2. Awards and decorations:
                           GCMDL(2)
a. Period entered for: 5 Years
b. Entry date: 891013
c. Age: 28 Years DOB: 601012
d. Educational level: 14 Years
e. Aptitude area score:
         GT: 115 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E5
2 Year(s) 2 Month(s) 22 Day(s)

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 911114-920202

         Mil conf

         Civil conf

         Other

6. Nonjudicial punishment:

         Date     Offense(s)
         911023 FTG, three specifications (911016); (911017); (911018)

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

Other discharge(s):

         Service From      To        Type Discharge
         ARNGUS 780526 780720 NA
         ADT 780721 781103 Hon Rel
         ARNGUS 781104 791001 HD
         RA 841113 871109 HD
         RA 871110 881012 HD

PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

         a. The evidence of record shows that on 6 February 1992, the applicant was charged with AWOL (911114-920203). On 7 February 1992, 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 indicated that 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 veteran’s benefits. The applicant submitted a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander and intermediate commander recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 2 March 1992, the Staff Judge Advocate concurred. On 6 March 1992, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

         b. On 23 March 1992, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had 2 years, 2 months, and 22 days on his current enlistment and 81 days lost time.

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 990803, with four (4) 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:
         ( ) Records review ( X ) Hearing

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

         c. Review/hearing location and date:
1.       Video Examination at Atlanta, Georgia on 16 February 2000.
2.       Hearing Examination at Washington, DC on 25 February 2000.

         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: NONE

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), (2), and (3) The issues are rejected. The Board carefully examined the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review. There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses. The Board noted that the discrediting entries in the applicant's record were not outweighed by prior or subsequent service of sufficient merit to warrant an upgrade of the discharge being reviewed. 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. 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. Armstrong
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: 1999033655 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 000218 A0100
Character of Service: UD A9500
Date of Discharge: 920323
Authority: AR 635-200 C10
Reason: A7000
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: NC 4-1

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 | CY2003 | AR2003095922

Original file (AR2003095922.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

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. On 12 July 1992, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000040519

Original file (2000040519.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge as a Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000038600

Original file (2000038600.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The evidence of record shows that on undated, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l3, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a general discharge. A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE C-1: DD Form 149, dated 990929. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MRS. WADE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII -...
ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | AR1999024238

Original file (AR1999024238.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED) 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 EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted...
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000048816

Original file (2000048816.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE c-1: DD Form 149, dated 001022. Beyond that, the record does not contain evidence that either the applicant’s characterization of service or narrative reason for discharge were changed. 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 - CERTIFICATION Approval...
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003097147

Original file (AR2003097147.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

SECTION B - Prior Service Data Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge RA 851030 881103 Honorable PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. On 1 May 1992, the applicant was discharged. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C...
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000044495

Original file (2000044495.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

However, someone involved in the discharge process erroneously changed the narrative reason for separation to “Misconduct – Commission of a Serious Offense.” Additionally, Regulations currently in effect, list the proper reason for the applicant’s discharge as “Misconduct.” Accordingly, the Board directs an administrative correction of the narrative reason for separation on the applicant’s DD Form 214 from “Misconduct- Commission of a Serious Offense” to “Misconduct.” This administrative...
ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025298

Original file (1999025298.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 | CY2003 | 2003094106

Original file (2003094106.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

On 21 November 1991, 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. 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 -...
ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001051809

Original file (2001051809.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and submitted a statement in his own behalf. A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE C-1: DD Form 149, dated 001018. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999033655

Similar Decisions