Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010861
Original file (AR20070010861.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name: ?????

Application Receipt Date: 070806	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submited by the applicant.

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: 010601
Discharge Received:     Date: 010906   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: HHC, 3-15 IN, Fort Stewart, GA 31314 

Time Lost: AWOL x 2 for 49 days (000307-000409), surrendered, and (000414-000429), mode of return unknown. 

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

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Year/Month:  8001  
HOR City, State: Windermere, FL
Current ENL Date: 980603    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 03  Yrs, 01 Mos, 14 Days ?????
Total Service:  03  Yrs, 01 Mos, 14 Days Includes 478 days of excess leave (000517-010906).
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11M10 Fighting Vehicle Infantryman   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 8 May 2000, the applicant was charged with AWOL (000307-000410) and (000414-000430).  On 8 May 2000, 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 6 August 2001, 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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The evidence of record indicates that 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, the analyst noted the applicant's issue and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.  Additionally, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  Finally, 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.  In View of the foregoing, 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.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 6 August 2008              
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 0    No change 5   - 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.





















  

								        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: NA
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: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 11 August 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070010861
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 5 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080007222

    Original file (AR20080007222.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the Applicant II. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The available record also includes a counseling statement dated 4 September 2001 indicating the applicant failed to report for a unit wide urinalysis test after he was called and directed by a noncommissioned officer.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090004058

    Original file (AR20090004058.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 1 May 2007, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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 | CY2006 | AR20060009762

    Original file (AR20060009762.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 II. His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS (i.e., in lieu of court-martial) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "4."

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110009909

    Original file (AR20110009909.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 11 July 2000, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and the applicant was aware of it prior to requesting discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013970

    Original file (AR20070013970.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | AR20070006646C071116

    Original file (AR20070006646C071116.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | AR20070012340

    Original file (AR20070012340.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016574

    Original file (AR20060016574.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...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015167

    Original file (AR20060015167.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. Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070006195

    Original file (AR20070006195.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. 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.