Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003093597
Original file (2003093597.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): 030522

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:
                            NDSM
a. Period entered for: 3 Years ASR
b. Entry date: 020701
c. Age: 21 Years DOB: 810426
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 101 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E4
0 Year(s) 10 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: NONE

 Status Inclusive dates
         AWOL

         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: The applicant assignment history shows she received adverse action on (030307) which reduced her from an E4/SPC to an E2/PVT.


SECTION B - Prior Service Data


Other discharge(s):

          Service   From      To        Type Discharge
         RA       990625   020701   Honorable



PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

         a. The evidence of record shows that on 12 May 2003, the applicant was charged with failing to go to her appointed place of duty, four specifications; (030331); (030407); (030417); (030421); disobeying a lawful order from a SFC, two specifications; (030401); (030505); making an official statement which was false (030404); failing to pay just debts in the amount of $326.00 (030401) and breaking restriction (030330). On 12 May 2003, 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 indicated that she understood that she 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 did not submit submitted a statement in her own behalf. The unit commander and intermediate commander recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 14 May 2003, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.

         b. On 22 May 2003, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 10 months, and 22 days of active military service in the period under review and had a total of 3 years, 10 months and 28 days of active military service.

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 under other than honorable conditions 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 030616.
         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 February 2004 .

         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 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 2 3

         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. RON WILLIAMS
Case Reviewing Official 

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

Approval Authority:


SPURGEON A. MOORE
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 - Other
B - Material submitted by applicant

INDEX RECORD:

 AR Number: 2003093597 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 040204 A0100
Character of Service: UD A9500
Date of Discharge: 030522
Authority: AR 635-200 C10
Reason: A7000
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: NC 3-2 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 | CY2003 | AR2003097093

    Original file (AR2003097093.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200 by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. On 22 May 2003, the applicant was discharged. 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 NONE SECTION B -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003099346

    Original file (AR2003099346.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Evidence of record shows that on 7 March 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR20040000362

    Original file (AR20040000362.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 22 May 2003, 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. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION SECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003098585

    Original file (AR2003098585.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. On 27 December 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003086054

    Original file (2003086054.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 16 September 2002, the applicant was discharged. 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 Authority:SPURGEON A. MOORE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003088079

    Original file (2003088079.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. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:SPURGEON A. MOORE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003089201

    Original file (2003089201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 600-8-24 by reason of miscellaneous/general reasons, with a characterization of service of honorable. 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 Authority:SPURGEON A. MOORE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002075915

    Original file (2002075915.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: SPURGEON A. MOORE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: JOHN F. LONG Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003087963

    Original file (2003087963.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. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003091115

    Original file (2003091115.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 12 June 1997, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.