Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080002091
Original file (AR20080002091.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/02/01	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: "I would like and upgrade because I would like to go to school and I can't afford to pay for it by myself.  So if you give me the chance to prove myself, I know I will make an outstanding United States citizen."

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 011205
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 020114   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: C Co, 2/504th PIR, Ft Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: AWOL 93 days (001103-010202), apprehended by civil authorities. 

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

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 990317    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 06 Mos, 26 Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 06 Mos, 26 Days Excess leave 336 days (010213-020114)
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B Infantryman   GT: 94   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Robertsville, MO
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed by the Applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 12 February 2001, the Applicant was charged with being AWOL (001103-010203).  On 12 February 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 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 the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 13 December 2001, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request 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 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.  Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the Applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.  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. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 14 November 2008         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

VIII.  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.  
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
								         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: No Change										
RE Code: 									 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080002091
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 2 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090010220

    Original file (AR20090010220.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. 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:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011849

    Original file (AR20080011849.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080018248

    Original file (AR20080018248.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090006308

    Original file (AR20090006308.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. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120007366

    Original file (AR20120007366.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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070011653

    Original file (AR20070011653.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? I was informed that I would have the chance to join again, and I had a new enlistment contract at the time I was discharged, and was supposed to ship to basic training. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070014410

    Original file (AR20070014410.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? I thank the Board for their time. 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 | CY2012 | AR20120004428

    Original file (AR20120004428.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 17 August 2011, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The analyst noted the applicant’s issue about his medical conditions; however, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these medical conditions did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014124

    Original file (AR20060014124.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 051206 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of trial by Court Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: US Army 82nd Replacement Detachment, 82nd Paratrooper Support Battalion, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC 28310 Time Lost: AWOL, for a total of 1,552 days from (01/07/11-05/10/13). On 18 November 2005, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010832

    Original file (AR20080010832.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting documentation 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.