Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080012921
Original file (AR20080012921.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/08/14	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 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: 030213
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 030611   Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial By Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: E Co, 2-54 IN Regt, Fort Benning, GA 

Time Lost: 392 days, AWOL (020110-030205), 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:  27
Current ENL Date: 010613    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 10Mos, 27Days Includes 118 days of Excess leave (030214-030611)
Total Service:  		01 Yrs, 01Mos, 00Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	IADT 980217-980521/UNC
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10/Infantryman   GT: 102   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Coral Springs, FL
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 13 February 2003, the applicant was charged with being AWOL (020110-030206).  On 13 February 2003, 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 20 May 2003, 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: 22 May 2009         Location: Washington, D.C.

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
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 AR20080012921
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110019615

    Original file (AR20110019615.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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. 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 | CY2009 | AR20090010724

    Original file (AR20090010724.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 030618 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Company U, 262nd Quartermaster Battalion, Fort Lee, VA Time Lost: AWOL x 1, for 150 days from (030105-030604). 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090019031

    Original file (AR20090019031.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. Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted two character reference letters in support of his records review.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080002571

    Original file (AR20080002571.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05 Mos, 24 Days ????? 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015478

    Original file (AR20060015478.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 01 Mos, 29 Days Item 12c on DD Form 214, net active service this period is incorrect, should read 01 Yrs, 01 Mos, 29 Days. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 28 November 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120005651

    Original file (AR20120005651.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 November 2007, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Army policy states that although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080002750

    Original file (AR20080002750.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • 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 | CY2007 | AR20070016575

    Original file (AR20070016575.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. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 1 No change 4 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Issue a new...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100021753

    Original file (AR20100021753.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he completed his full term of service and was told at the time he signed his DD Form 214, he could upgrade his discharge after 6 months. Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.