Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011946
Original file (AR20080011946.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 080728	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting 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: 990408
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 990920   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial 	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: C Battery, 1st BN, 15th FA, Camp Casey, Korea. 

Time Lost: AWOL for 79 days (990112-990331), surrendered.

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:  23
Current ENL Date: 980304    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 03Mos, 29Days ?????
Total Service:  		01 Yrs, 03Mos, 29Days Including 165 days of excess leave.
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B Cannon Crewmember   GT: 84   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Miami, FL
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states that since separation from the Army, he and his wife both have steady jobs.  He also earned a BS Degree in Science, and have been out of trouble with the law since.  He is an active church member, providing services to his community, and would like the Army to give him another chance to prove that he can be a good soldier and contributor.  The applicant did not provide any supporting documents.  

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 5 April 1999, the applicant was charged with being AWOL (990112-990331).  On 8 April 1999, 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 17 August 1999, 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 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.   Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  An RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  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: 21 April 2009         Location: Atlanta, GA

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, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst’s 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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080011946
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070016529

    Original file (AR20070016529.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 13 October 2004, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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. Yes No Counsel: N/A Witnesses/Observers: N/A Exhibits Submitted: N/A VIII.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008212

    Original file (AR20090008212.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, "I have been elected as a State Constable in the state of Alabama. 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 | CY2010 | AR20100019047

    Original file (AR20100019047.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 24 September 2004, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed 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 that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: None VIII.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010969

    Original file (AR20080010969 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 15 August 2006, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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 | CY2008 | AR20080004749

    Original file (AR20080004749.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 | AR20080013162

    Original file (AR20080013162.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 November 2006, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008808

    Original file (AR20090008808.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Furthermore, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's good service record and accomplishments while assigned to Germany and Iraq; however, the analyst noted that even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090009733

    Original file (AR20090009733.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 20 April 2004, 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 | AR20070011405

    Original file (AR20070011405.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 07 Mos, 19 Days ????? 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 | CY2008 | AR20080005857

    Original file (AR20080005857.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...