Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2008/07/16 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant.
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: 981211
Discharge Received: Date: 010205 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: D Co. 1/46 Inf, Ft Knox, KY
Time Lost: AWOL X 2 for 34 days, (981008-981011, 981107-981208), surrendered to military authorities
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 18
Current ENL Date: 980928 Current ENL Term: 04 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 03 Mos, 02 Days includes 787 days excess leave (981212-010205)
Total Service: 02 Yrs, 03 Mos, 02 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: None GT: 103 EDU: HS Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: Bowie, MD
Post Service Accomplishments: See attached documents submitted by the applicant.
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 11 December 1998, the applicant was charged with being AWOL X 2 (981008-981011, 981107-981208). On 11 December 1998, 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 veterans benefits. The applicant did 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 19 December 2000, 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 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 a careful review of all the applicants military records, and the issue submitted with the application, 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. 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.
VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing
Type of Hearing: Date: 2 February 2009 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: Yes
Witnesses/Observers: None
Exhibits Submitted: Yes
VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, 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
X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: None
Other: None
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20080011246
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 2 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013697
Applicant Name: ????? On 8 August 1999, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions 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 | AR20070009976
Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. However, in review of the applicants entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110005694
Applicant Name: ????? 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 that prior to requesting discharge. Although the applicant did not properly annotate the DD Form 149 requesting a review of his record for a possible upgrade of his discharge; he was given the benefit of this review as instructed in pertinent part (E.3.1.3.2) by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080004097
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 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 discharge was both...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090011175
The analyst noted that on the applicant's DD Form 214 block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code reads "3," however, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, which according to AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD)/Reentry (RE) Codes Cross-Reference Table, requires a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "4." It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100012426
Applicant Name: ????? 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.
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100028437
Applicant Name: ????? Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 981008 Discharge Received: Date: 990106 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: C Battery, 1st Battalion, 56th Air Defense Artillery Regiment, Fort Bliss, TX Time Lost: AWOL x 1 from (970820-980517) for 271 days. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010865
Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: I am asking for a request of change in my discharge due to civilian career. It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant would have been aware of that prior to requesting discharge.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070016063
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. 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 Issue a new...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080000909
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. 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.