Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060011681
Original file (AR20060011681.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Application Receipt Date: 060816	

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: 020207
Discharge Received:     Date: 020320   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: 403rd Transportation Company, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: Absent without leave for a total of 55 days (010529-010722).  The applicant surrendered to military authorities at Fort Sam Houston, TX, and was transferred to Fort Sill, OK.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  811207  
Current ENL Date: 000803    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  (The applicant's DD Form 214 Item 12a incorrectly show his "Date Entered AD This Period" as: Year 2000, Month 03, and Day 08, the DD Form 214 should read as Year 2000, Month 08, Day 03, based on enlistment contract found in his record).
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05Mos, 24Days (Includes 237 days of excess leave 010727-020320)
Total Service:  02 Yrs, 10Mos, 03Days (Applicant's DD Form 214 Item 12e "Total Prior Inactive Service" does no show period of service in the USAR from 990324-000802)
Previous Discharges: USAR-990324-000802/NA
Highest Grade: E3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 88H10 (Cargo Specialist)   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR
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 evidence of record shows that on 27 July 2001, the applicant was charged with going AWOL from 29 May 2001 to 23 July 2001.  On 27 July 2001, 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 veteran’s benefits.  The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 14 February 2002, the separation authority approved the discharge with a under other than honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was to be reduced to private E1.

      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 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.

      c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
      After a careful review of all the applicant’s 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.  Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  An RE code of “4” can not be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  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: 8 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 1    No change 4   - Character
		 			      Change 0    No change 5   - Reason
					      (Board member names available upon request)

IX.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s 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: 20 August 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060011681

Applicant Name:  Mr.      
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016242

    Original file (AR20060016242.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 individual's admission of guilt. Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090019020

    Original file (AR20090019020.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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. Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: None submitted by the applicant.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070012339

    Original file (AR20070012339.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The unit commander's recommendation is not in the record however, the intermediate commander recommended approval of 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 analyst noted that the record includes a DA Form 3881 (Rights Warning) signed by the applicant, a DA Form 2823 (Sworn Statement) where the applicant admits to use of cocaine, and a DD Form 2624...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080007730

    Original file (AR20080007730.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the Applicant. Total Service: 06 Yrs, 09 Mos, 16 Days Applicant's DD Form 214 appears not to accurately account for the Applicant's prior active/inactive service. On 31 July 2001, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080005501

    Original file (AR20080005501.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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 Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070017709

    Original file (AR20070017709.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. The DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060011616

    Original file (AR20060011616.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 07 Mos, 20 Days ????? 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. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016044

    Original file (AR20060016044.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070012970

    Original file (AR20070012970.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 19 December 2001, 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 | CY2006 | AR20060011605

    Original file (AR20060011605.txt) 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 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. ...