Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080018974
Original file (AR20080018974.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 081118	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The Applicant provided no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the board, see enclosed 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: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060302   Chapter: 10      AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: A Co, 615th Aviation Support Bn, 1st Cavalry Bde, 1st Cavalry Div, Ft. Hood, TX 

Time Lost: None

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: 020723    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 7Mos, 10Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 7Mos, 10Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92A10 Automated Logistical   GT: 110   EDU: HS Letter   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (040301-050303)
Decorations/Awards: AAM (not on DD Form 214), NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, ICM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Killeen, TX
Post Service Accomplishments: Nothing provided by the Applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 9 January 2006, the applicant was charged with conspiracy to steal government funds by pumping gas into his privately owned vehicle knowing that it was being paid for by a Government Voyager fuel card (050831); larceny of government funds (050902); steal money, military property (050831); steal money, military property (050902); steal money of a value of $580 of another Soldier (051008).  On 6 February 2006, 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.  On 10 February 2206 the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  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 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 that even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  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: 090902         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 2    No change 3
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 AR20080018974
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080003713

    Original file (AR20080003713.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 28 November 2005, 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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090012560

    Original file (AR20090012560.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, "I request that my discharge be changed because it has been three years since my separation. On 28 November 2005, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090013061

    Original file (AR20090013061.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 5 May 2000, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a general, under honorable conditions or a fully honorable discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | ar20090006531

    Original file (ar20090006531.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 21 November 2003, 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.

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070001430

    Original file (AR20070001430.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 07 Mos, 22 Days ????? 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 | CY2007 | AR20070001430aC071031

    On 14 December 2005, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013377

    Original file (AR20070013377.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. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080019278

    Original file (AR20080019278.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. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100028928

    Original file (AR20100028928.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. On 9 February 2007, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010582

    Original file (AR20080010582.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application Receipt Date: 2008/05/12 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. 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:...