Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2011/11/07 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: The applicant states, in effect, when she left the Army, she thought that she didnt have a choice. She was young and insecure, from a broken home, and thought she would lose her husband and son if she stayed in the military. She was proud to be in the Army and her joining was a decision she made with her husband. After she left for training, her husband lost their home and their son began having health problems which continued throughout his childhood. The stress was too much for her husband to handle. She felt like her only option was to go home and take care of them. She was in the process of obtaining a discharge for family reasons, but she was given some bad advice by another recruit whos husband was a Sergeant. She was told that if she left before six months, there would be no repercussions and it was like she was never in the Army. If she waited, she would not be able to get out before the end of her term without jail time if she was caught.
After leaving her duty station without leave, she lived in fear of getting caught. She became pregnant the
month after she left, so she thought that she couldnt go back if she wanted to. She turned herself in after a few months, hoping to clear her name and agreed to a discharge in lieu of court-martial. She didnt fully realize then the repercussions of this sort of discharge and the shame that would follow. In her life, she has made many poor choices, but leaving the military was the biggest mistake of her life. Now, she is a year away from getting her Associate Degree In Nursing, and she is hoping to have the chance to serve her country again. If she is unable to rejoin due to her reentry code, she would as least like to serve as a civilian employee and care for wounded Soldiers and their families.
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: 001117
Discharge Received: Date: 010124 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: W Company, 244th Quartermaster Battalion, 23rd Quartermaster Brigade, Fort Lee, VA
Time Lost: AWOL for 151 days (000220-000719), surrendered. Total lost time is 151 days.
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: 20
Current ENL Date: 990924 Current ENL Term: 04 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 11 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Total Service: 00 Yrs, 11 Mos, 00 Days Includes 181 days of excess leave (000728-010124)
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: None GT: 115 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: Attending college
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 26 July 2000, the applicant was charged with being absent without leave (000220-000720).
On 28 July 2000, 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 she understood she could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans benefits. The applicant did not submit a statement in her own behalf. The unit commander recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
On 3 January 2001, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed 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 and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.
The evidence of record indicates that 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 that prior to requesting discharge.
The applicant contends she left the Army because she thought that she didnt have a choice. She was young and insecure, from a broken home, and thought she would lose her husband and son if she stayed in the military. She was in the process of obtaining a discharge for family reasons, but she was given some bad advice from a recruit. The analyst noted the applicant's issues and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. Furthermore, analyst noted that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.
Additionally, the analyst noted the applicant's issues about her desire to rejoin the Service or serve as a civilian employee and care for wounded Soldiers and their families; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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. Additionally, 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 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: 4 May 2012 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: None
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: An online application, dated 3 November 2011; DD Form 214; and a copy of a birth certificate
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
Board Vote:
Character - Change 2 No change 3
Reason - Change 0 No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
X. Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA
XI. Certification Signature
Approval Authority:
EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board
BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder
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 AR20110022156
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 4 of 4 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120020054
IN THE CASE OF: Ms. BOARD DATE: 17 April 2013 CASE NUMBER: AR20120020054 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicants length and quality of her service to...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100016541
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 the applicant was aware of it prior to requesting discharge. Finally, the applicant contends that the narrative reason for his discharge should be changed because he was suffering from a mental condition.
NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01026
MD04-01026 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040607. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. I was discharged December 13, 2001 from the Marine Corps with an Other Than honorable discharge.
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090011267
Applicant Name: ????? Lt. Col. [redacted] also said I would get legal assistance for the problems with my ex-husband [redacted] and his no contact order for attempting to contact the child we share together, [redacted]. 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 Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600231
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I went into the military for a change of life, venture, career help, and to send money home to my mother for watching my son. 000118: Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense.Service Record was missing elements of the Summary of Service.
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110019310
Applicant Name: ????? Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 090520 Discharge Received: Date: 090629 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Company M, 244th Quartermaster Battalion, Fort Lee, VA Time Lost: AWOL x 1 (090201-090502) for 92 days; the applicant surrendered to the military authorities at Fort Knox, KY. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080008141
On 4 September 1996, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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, to include the extraordinary family circumstances which led to the applicant's AWOL and discharge from the Army, the Board determined that the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120020087
The Board recommended the applicant be separated with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. S Army Reserve involuntarily separated her after she had failed to participate with her reserve unit and issued her an under other than honorable discharge. Arlington, VA Date: 1 April 2013 The Army Discharge Review Board, under the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553, in the case of the applicant named in page 1, directs the ARBA Promulgation...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070017725
Applicant Name: ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 07Mos, 24Days includes 95 days of excess leave from (061201-070305). 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 | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011118
c. A CID Form 94 (Agent's Investigation Report), dated 12 January 2012, which shows that while conducting a search of the applicant's residence, his wife and mother-in-law returned home from visiting him at the hospital and they both were irate toward all law enforcement officers (LEO) on scene. She stated she should have let him kill everyone in that building, and when he returned home from the hospital, she was not going to stop him again. On 17 August 2012, the applicant was informed...