Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2010/04/27 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: The applicant state, in effect, that he honestly would like to have the opportunity to redeem himself worthy, because he was in a bad place in his life. He realize that he made a mistake and wants to prove that he is a better person mentally than he was then. He thanks the board in advance for the time to have his situation presented and if given the chance, he will prove that he is worthy of an upgrade of his characterization of service.
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: 030122
Discharge Received: Date: 030130 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Company, 1st Battalion, 508th Infantry (Airborne), 173rd Airborne Brigade, APO AE, Italy
Time Lost: None
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: 33
Current ENL Date: 980813 Current ENL Term: 5 Years The applicant extended his enlistment for 1 month on (020502) giving him a new ETS date of: (030912).
Current ENL Service: 4 Yrs, 5 Mos, 17 Days ?????
Total Service: 9 Yrs, 2 Mos, 14 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 931117-980812/HD
Highest Grade: E-5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 75B10 Personnel Admin Spec GT: 103 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Italy (960625-030130) Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM (2), GCMDL (2), NDSM, SWASMDLw/1 BSS, AFSM, NATOMDL, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR (2), C/Ach (4)
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 13 November 2002, the applicant was charged with dereliction of duty,making an official statement, which was false, and secreting mail.
On 22 January 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 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 veterans benefits. The applicant submitted a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
On 23 January 2003 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, 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 applicants 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. 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 the applicant was aware of it prior to requesting discharge.
The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he would like to have the opportunity to redeem himself worthy, because he was in a bad place in his life. He realize that he made a mistake and wants to prove that he is a better person mentally than he was then. The analyst determined that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. The analyst further found no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. Additionally, the analyst considered the applicants quality of service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge.
Additionally, 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 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: 14 January 2011 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: None
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 19 April 2010.
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: No Change
Other: No Change
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change
Legend:
AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial
BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial
CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge
DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable
FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20100013914
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | ar20090006891
Applicant Name: ????? On 6 February 2003, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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 | CY2009 | AR20090018414
On 30 January 2003, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090004645
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 | CY2009 | AR20090009572
Applicant Name: ????? On 28 January 2003, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than 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 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070012364
Applicant Name: ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 04 Mos, 26Days ????? 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 | CY2010 | AR20100017744
Applicant Name: ????? 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. Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: Online application dated 27 May 2010.
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090012254
The applicant's DD Form 214, which he refused to sign, indicates he 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. 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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100030453
Applicant Name: ????? On 24 August 1999, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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 | CY2010 | AR20100025684
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 | CY2008 | AR20080003711
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 recommendation and...