Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100027831
Original file (AR20100027831.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/11/10	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he requesting an upgrade of his discharge so that he can stay on the right path and find some type of employment opportunities.  He is trying to better himself, but he is running into road blocks with his current discharge. He wants to find a job or even get financial help to go to school. 

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: 000721
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 010117   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: Company E, 169TH Transportation Battalion, 1st Engineer Brigade, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 

Time Lost: AWOL x 1 from (990420-990531) for 42 days. The applicant surrendered to the military authorities at Fort Jackson, SC and was transferred to Fort Knox, KY.

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:  19
Current ENL Date: OAD/980907    Current ENL Term: 27 weeks Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 2 Mos, 29 Days The computation includes 583 days of excess leave from (990615-010117)
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 6 Mos, 14 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ARNG 980521-980906/NA
Highest Grade: E-1		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 90   EDU: GED Cert   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

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 14 June 1999, the applicant was charged with AWOL from (990420-990601).  On 14 June 1999, 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.  On 14 December 2000, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

       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, 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 applicant’s 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 is trying to find some type of employment to better himself or even get financial help to go to school.  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 Post-9/11 or 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.
       
       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: 18 July 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 4 November 2010.










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: 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 AR20100027831
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090006308

    Original file (AR20090006308.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 | CY2006 | AR20060011694

    Original file (AR20060011694.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | AR20080004717

    Original file (AR20080004717.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 5 Mos, 24 Days Includes 256 days of excess leave (010406-011217); further, the date entered active duty during the prior period of enlistment on the DD Form 214, item 12a is incorrect; should be: (960329), see DD Form 4/3 Confirmation of Enlistment or Reenlistment. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100011199

    Original file (AR20100011199.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. The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he would like to be able to apply for veterans benefits, employment and reenlistment.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090018414

    Original file (AR20090018414.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2007 | AR20070010917

    Original file (AR20070010917.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. His DD Form 214 indicates that 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110014252

    Original file (AR20110014252.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he is requesting an upgrade of his discharge to general, under honorable conditions because after having time to reflect on the incident that caused his discharge, he feels that he made an honest mistake. 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 that prior to requesting...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060012654

    Original file (AR20060012654.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293 and supporting documents. 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 recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions. Board Discussion, Determination,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110005815

    Original file (AR20110005815.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 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...

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070008568

    Original file (AR20070008568.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that whether an other than honorable discharge was a proper ascription of character of service, and whether post-service conduct warrants clemency. 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...