Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110002730
Original file (AR20110002730.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/02/08	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he is trying to join the National Guard.  He joined the Army in March of 2008 and was only 17 years old and wanted to serve his country and support his family.  When he was in basic training he started getting letters from home that his new born daughter wasn't being taken care of and that his money was being spent on stuff that wasn't needed, instead of diapers and bottles and things for his little girl.  He now has a steady job and his own place and wants to be able to have another chance to serve his country.  

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: 081029   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: F Company, 3/34th Infantry Regiment, Fort Jackson, SC 

Time Lost: AWOL x 1 from (080512-080625) for 44 days.  The applicant was apprehended by the civilian authorities at Monette, AR and was transferred to Fort Sill, OK.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  17
Current ENL Date: 080319    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  34 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 27 Days The computation includes 104 days of excess leave from (080718-081029)
Total Service:  		0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 27 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-1		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: NIF   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 applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  
       
       The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, 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., in lieu of trial by court-martial) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "4."   

       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 available 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 only pertinent evidence available for review regarding the applicant's discharge is the DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, which was not authenticated by the applicant.  The DD Form 214 shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In connection with such a discharge, the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  
       
       Procedurally, the applicant was required to consult with defense counsel and to voluntarily, and in writing, request 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.  In the absence of information to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  It also noted the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant would have been aware of it prior to requesting discharge.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he joined the Army in March of 2008 and was only 17 years old and wanted to serve his country and support his family and now wants to join the National Guard.  The analyst found 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.  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. .
       
       The applicant further contends that when he was in basic training he started getting letters from home that his new born daughter wasn't being taken care of and that his money was being spent on stuff that wasn't needed, instead of diapers and bottles and things for his little girl.  While the applicant may believe his family issues at home was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief from his issues through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other resources available to all Soldiers.  Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct.  
       
       Additionally, the burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will still be his  responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record.
       
       Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and 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: 7 September 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 19 January 2011.

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: 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 AR20110002730
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120007121

    Original file (AR20120007121.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 20 June 2002, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120004550

    Original file (AR20120004550.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? EF married the applicant’s sister-in-law and agreed that EF and his wife would live with the applicant and wife and that EF would pay $400 a month rent starting in September. After a thorough review of the applicant’s records and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommends to the Board to deny clemency.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070011653

    Original file (AR20070011653.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? I was informed that I would have the chance to join again, and I had a new enlistment contract at the time I was discharged, and was supposed to ship to basic training. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000687

    Original file (AR20090000687.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 | CY2010 | AR20100015659

    Original file (AR20100015659.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 | CY2009 | AR20090018659

    Original file (AR20090018659.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? I am Writing this request to have my discharge upgraded from other than honorable to general. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 061013 Discharge Received: Date: 061214 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: A Battery, 95th Adjutant General Reception Battalion, Fort Sill, OK. Time Lost: AWOL x 1 from (060705-060829) for 55 days.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090012523

    Original file (AR20090012523.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: Applicant states he was only 17 and that he had family problems because he called home and his mother informed him that she was not well, and she has a serious drug problem. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

  • 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 | CY2008 | AR20080004299

    Original file (AR20080004299.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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 trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. In the absence of information to the contrary, the Analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090013000

    Original file (AR20090013000.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...