Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060012040
Original file (AR20060012040.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Application Receipt Date: 060823	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See 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: 941216
Discharge Received:     Date: 950119   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: Battery A, 1st Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery, Fort Hood, TX  76545 

Time Lost: AWOL x 2, for a total of 124 days from (940714-940808) and (940823-941128).  He was apprehended by the civilian authorities in Suffolk, VA and was transferred to the military authorities at Fort Knox, KY  40121-5000

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

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  741228  
Current ENL Date: 931004    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 11 Mos, 15 Days The applicant was placed on excess leave for a total of 46 days from (941205-950119)
Total Service:  0 Yrs, 11 Mos, 15 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E2
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B10 Cannon Crewmember   GT: 93   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, 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 5 December 1994, the applicant was charged with AWOL, from (23 August 1994-29 November 1994).  On 5 December 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 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 a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 29 December 1994, 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.  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 several mitigating factors that would warrant an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  The analyst determined that while the applicant's misconduct was a clear departure from acceptable Army standards, the analyst found that the offense was partially mitigated by the applicant's youth and immaturity (i.e., he was 18 years of age at the time of his enlistment), and the time that has elasped since his discharge.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. 
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 7 May 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: N/A




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     No change    (Character)
		 			       	Change     No change    (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, voted to deny relief.  






















Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Ron Williams, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: None
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 11 May 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060012040

Applicant Name:  Mr.       
______________________________________________________________________


Page 6 of 6 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009993

    Original file (AR20070009993.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The memorandum further indicates that the applicant's request was disapproved, and his defense counsel requested reconsideration of the applicant's request for separation in lieu of courts-martial. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060012203

    Original file (AR20060012203.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060009767

    Original file (AR20060009767.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in efect, that he is trying to become eligible for VA benefits. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 940518 Discharge Received: Date: 940624 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: 547th Medical Company, Hunter Army Air Field, GA 31409-5000 Time Lost: AWOL, for a total of 1,298 days from (901014-940503). It is...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060006026

    Original file (AR20060006026.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 28 June 1996, the separation authority approved the discharge 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. 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 | AR20060012220

    Original file (AR20060012220.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service-in lieu of court-martial, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014806

    Original file (AR20060014806.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 940418 Discharge Received: Date: 940516 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu Of Trial By Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: U.S. Army Personnel Center (USARPERCEN) St. Loius, MO 63132 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. On 21 April 1994, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009991

    Original file (AR20070009991.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | AR20060009264

    Original file (AR20060009264.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application Receipt Date: 060630 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293 and supporting document. 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 | CY2006 | AR20060009220

    Original file (AR20060009220.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 30 June 1994, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review and the issue he submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010454

    Original file (AR20060010454.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 051031 Discharge Received: Date: 051221 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: 82nd Replacement Detachment, 82nd Paratrooper Support Battalion, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC 28310 Time Lost: AWOL, for a total of 190 days from (13 April 2005 to 19 October 2005). Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s...