Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007698
Original file (AR20090007698.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/08	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: 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: 030709
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 030721   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: 659th Maint Company, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: AWOL x 6, for 1,074 days from (990721-990811); (990920-991205); (000104-000109); (000124-000129); (000205-000320); (000324-020924); apprehended; civil confinement for 238 days from (020928-030622); Total time lost: 1,312. 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 990409, Wrongfully used marijuana between on or about 990125-990225; AWOL, on or about 990317-990330; reduction to Private (E-1); forfeiture of pay for two months, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated on or before 990708; and 45 days of extra duty (FG)

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 980507    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	1 Yrs, 6 Mos, 13 Days The Net Active Service this period on the DD Form 214, item 12c is incorrect; should be as annotated above.  
Total Service:  		1 Yrs, 6 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92A1P Automated Logistical Spec   GT: 102   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 7 July 2003, the applicant was charged with AWOL x 3, from (000124-000130); (000205-000321); (000324-020928).  On 7 July 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 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 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 the applicant's issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. In view of the foregoing, 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: 13 January 2010         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 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 AR20090007698
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080014122

    Original file (AR20080014122.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 28 July 2000, 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: ?????

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080008420

    Original file (AR20080008420.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 22 June 2000, the separation authority approved the discharge 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: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016573

    Original file (AR20060016573.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080014621

    Original file (AR20080014621.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: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070012997

    Original file (AR20070012997.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. 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 | CY2006 | AR20060017302

    Original file (AR20060017302.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05 Mos, 28 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: 15 October 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080002781

    Original file (AR20080002781.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? I believe my military records and service will show that I deserve the upgrade. 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 AR20080002781 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100020256

    Original file (AR20100020256.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 010118 Discharge Received: Date: 010329 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Company A, 46th AG Battalion, (Reception), Fort Knox, KY Time Lost: AWOL x 1 from (991101-000131) for 92 days. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080000282

    Original file (AR20080000282.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. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070018918

    Original file (AR20070018918.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. 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...