Application Receipt Date: 2006/09/14
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: 1993/08/23
Discharge Received: Date: 1993/11/05
Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial
RE: SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: 988th Military Police Company, Fort Benning, GA 31905
Time Lost: AWOL, from (930630-930819), for a total of 51 Days. She surrendered to the Military Authorities, and was transferred to Fort Sill, OK 89608.
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
DOB: 731114
Current ENL Date: 920910 Current ENL Term: 5 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 00Mos, 06Days The applicant was placed on excess leave for a total of 72 days from (930824-931105).
Total Service: 1 Yrs, 00Mos, 06Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-2
Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 95B10 (Military Police) GT: 102 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record:
Current Address:
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states she joined Nevada NG in 1999. Records verify she served in OIF Iraq for 10 months in FEB 2003 and received an Honorable Discharge as an E-5. States she is currently an SSG in an AGR assignment and is slated to be discharged in Jan 2008. She states she is currently enrolled in College and working to complete a Nursing Degree
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 23 August 1993 the applicant was charged with AWOL, from (930630-930819). 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 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 veterans benefits. The applicant did not submit a statement in her own behalf. The unit commander recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 14 October 1993, 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 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 careful review of all the applicants military records, documents and the issue she submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicants discharge be upgraded to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "1." This recommendation was made after full consideration of her faithful and honorable service as well as her record of misconduct. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicants characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. While the applicants misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include her combat service since her discharge in 1993, and the time that has elapsed since her discharge mitigated the discrediting entry in her service record. However, the analyst determined the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable.
VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing
Type of Hearing: Date: 12 October 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 5 No change 0 - 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 characterization of service was too harsh based on the time elapsed since the discharge, post service accomplishments and recent combat tour of duty.
Case report reviewed and verified by: Busick, Chuck, Examiner
X. Board Action Directed
No Change
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: No change
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade:
XI. Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority:
MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board
Official:
CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 19 October 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20060013041
Applicant Name: Ms.
______________________________________________________________________
Page 6 of 6 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014935
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 31 July 1996, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance (received a Company Grade Article 15 on (960522) for three specifications of FTR), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080005101
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant. 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. An application for that Board is enclosed.
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090003044
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 14 August 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 12b, AR 635-200, for pattern of misconduct in that she blew .023 blood alcohol on (070503) and was under age, AWOL (070702-070709) and (070711-070716), failed to be at her appointed place of duty x6 (070626, 070622, 070620, 070611, 070608, 070606), with a general, under...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090013094
On 7 May 1996, the separation authority referred the applicant's separation case to a administrative separation board to determine whether the applicant should be separated from the Army IAW procedures set forth in AR 635-200. By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and the misconduct diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. However, in review of the applicants entire service record, the analyst found that these...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080006295
The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of her case by an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf. While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the length and quality of the applicant's service, to include her combat service and the recommendation of the unit and intermediate commanders for approval with a honorable discharge, mitigated the discrediting...
AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015159
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 01 May 1995, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct for failure to report, disobeying a lawful regulation, writing bad checks, failure to obey lawful orders and indebtedness, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. On 5 May 1995, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008787
Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293. Accordingly, the Board voted to upgrade the discharge to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: ESMERALDA G. PROCTOR DATE: 061027 Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010781
The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in her own behalf. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013361
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 7 October 1991, 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 (you will not develop sufficiently to become a satisfactory soldier; received a field grade article 15, and repeated counseling statements), with a general discharge. On 15 October 1991, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090002422
Current ENL Service: 4 Yrs, 00Mos, 06Days ????? After a thorough review of the applicants record and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommend to the Board to deny clemency. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND...