Applicant Name:
Application Receipt Date: 2008/08/22 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: 010423
Discharge Received: Date: 010822 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: USAMA, Fort Campbell, KY
Time Lost: AWOL X 2 for 409 days (990223-990301), surrendered and (990305-000409), apprehended.
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: 26
Current ENL Date: 980902 Current ENL Term: 04 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 10Mos, 02Days Includes 492 days of excess leave (980723-980901)
Total Service: 01 Yrs, 10Mos, 02Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 91C10/Practical Nurse GT: 111 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: Nashua, NH
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 17 April 2000, the applicant was charged with AWOL (990305 to 000410). On 17 April 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 she understood that she 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 not submit a statement in her own behalf. The unit commander recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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 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 during the period of enlistment under review, the documents, and the issue she 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. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issues, however, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. Further, the analyst acknowledges documents submitted by the applicant from the Community Council of Nashua, NH dated 23 June 2008, however, the record does not support the issue that the applicant suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. In view of the foregoing, 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: 3 June 2009 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 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 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 AR20080013380
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 3 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090009952
Applicant Name: ????? 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 | AR20070013573
Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080012668
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 applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080019763
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 21 September 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-pattern of misconduct for failure to report x 12 between (040303-040811), and receiving a Summary Court-Martial, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016450
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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090005201
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 applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060011694
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 10 Mos, 28 Days ????? 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. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 11 September 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080012681
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: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013863
Applicant Name: ????? The unit commander recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request 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 that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011585
Applicant Name: ????? 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. Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: None VIII.