Application Receipt Date: 060808
Prior Review Prior Review Date: None
I. Applicant Request
Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293.
II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?
Yes No Tender Offer: ?????
See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits
III. Original Character of Discharge
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 940920
Discharge Received: Date: 941003
Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial
RE: SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: Detachment D, 510th Personnel Services Battalion, APO AE 09630
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
DOB: 700423
Current ENL Date: 930907 Current ENL Term: 04 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 00Mos, 27Days ?????
Total Service: 04 Yrs, 11Mos, 29Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-891005-930906/HD
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 63B10 (Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic) GT: 115 EDU: GED Overseas: Turkey, Italy Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AGCM, ASR, OSR (2d Award), SWASM (w/3 bronze stars), KLM
V. Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record:
Current Address:
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The applicants DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) is not contained in the available record, and the analyst presumed Government Regularity in the discharge process. On 14 September 1994, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, 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 he understood that he could receive a under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans benefits. The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander and intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a under other than honorable conditions discharge. The separation authorities documentation approving the separation action and directing that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is not part of the available records, and the analyst presumed Government Regularity in the discharge process.
b. Legal Basis for Separation:
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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 a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individuals 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.
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:
After a careful review of all the applicants military records, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 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 applicant consulted with defense counsel, and voluntarily in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated or lesser-included offenses under the UCMJ. The analyst noted that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. It is 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. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable.
VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing
Type of Hearing: Date: 15 August 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: NA
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: NA
VIII. Board Decision
The discharge was: Proper Improper
Equitable Inequitable
The characterization of service was: Proper Improper
Equitable Inequitable
The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable
DRB voting record: Change 2 No change 3 - Character
Change 0 No change 5 - Reason
(Board member names available upon request)
IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted to deny relief.
Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, Examiner
X. Board Action Directed
No Change
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA
XI. Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority:
MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board
Official:
CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 22 August 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20060011575
Applicant Name: Mr.
______________________________________________________________________
Page 5 of 5 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070006646C071116
Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 020920 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Time Lost: Absent without leave for a total of 415 days (010627-020815). It is 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. Board Discussion,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013970
Applicant Name: ????? On 19 January 1999, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. It is 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.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013564
On 20 April 2007, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individuals admission of guilt.
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010214
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 a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. It is 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. ...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070012340
Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached document submitted by the applicant. Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 4 Mos, 0 Days The applicant was placed on excess leave for 41 days (070316-070425). Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009976
Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. However, in review of the applicants entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009968
Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant. It is 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.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013977
Applicant Name: ????? Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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 a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013359
Applicant Name: ????? Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It is 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.
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014504
Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted to deny relief. Certification Signature and Date Approval...