Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090011092
Original file (AR20090011092.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/06/16	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 149 and attached documents submitted by the applicant in lieu of DD Form 293.

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: 060106   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: A Co, 1-9th FA Bn, APO AE 09380 

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:  20
Current ENL Date: 040218    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 10Mos, 19Days ?????
Total Service:  		01 Yrs, 10Mos, 19Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13D10 Field Artillery Automation   GT: 110   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (Dates NIF)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, CAB

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  South Bend, IN 
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 November 2005, the applicant was charged with disrespectful in language and deportment toward a SGT (051015), disrespectful in language and deportment toward a 1SG (051015), and wrongfully communicating to a SSG a threat that a SGT is going to die and he was going to make sure of it (051015).  On 27 November 2005, 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 applicant's chain of command recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 2 December 2009 (i.e., 2006), 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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  While the applicant’s misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the length and quality of the applicant’s service; to include his combat service, mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that relief be granted in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.  This action entails a restoration of grade to PFC/E-3.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 22 December 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 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: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090011092
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080019487

    Original file (AR20080019487.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 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090013151

    Original file (AR20090013151.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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090012328

    Original file (AR20090012328.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: No Change Other: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080007223

    Original file (AR20080007223.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached document submitted by the applicant. The DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS (i.e., for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090009696

    Original file (AR20090009696.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 15 March 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct, commission of a serious offense in that she falsely made the signature of one commissioned officer and two noncommissioned officers on official documents, falsely changed the dates on her leave form and was derelict in the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013010

    Original file (AR20060013010.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. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090010409

    Original file (AR20090010409.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under 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 Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060006709

    Original file (AR20060006709.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable and change the narrative reason for...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090006997

    Original file (AR20090006997.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 17 Feb 2005, 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: E4 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080002084

    Original file (AR20080002084.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12c( 2) by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions discharge. The DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12c (2) by reason of misconduct-drug abuse, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.