IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  2 February 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110013934 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests upgrade of his other than honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states he feels he served his country loyally and was an excellent Soldier before he was placed under corrupt leadership.  The company commander and the first sergeant were both relieved.  He was absent without leave (AWOL) for less than 6 months and returned to accept responsibility.  His assigned lawyer said he had to choose between going to prison or requesting discharge.  It is unfair that no one takes into consideration the good things he has done.  He fought for his country which makes him more of an American than most people.  He would like the discharge upgraded so that he can move on with his life.

3.  The applicant provides no documents to support his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted and entered active duty on 5 October 2004.  He completed training, including military occupational specialty (MOS) training as a radio and communications security repair specialist and was assigned to Fort Bragg, NC on 25 July 2005.  He was advanced to pay grade E-4 on 1 June 2006.

2.  The applicant was AWOL from 3 November 2007 until 31 March 2008.  On 24 April 2008, charges were preferred for that AWOL.

3.  The applicant consulted with counsel, he voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He indicated he understood the elements of the charge against him and admitted he was guilty of at least one offense or a lesser-included offense for which a punitive discharge was authorized.  He also acknowledged he would receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions.  He also understood he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits and he might be ineligible for veterans' benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs.  He stated he understood he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of this discharge.

4.  The chain of command endorsed the applicant's request for discharge.  The general court-martial convening authority approved the request and directed an under other than honorable conditions discharge and reduction to the rank and pay grade of private (PV1)/E-1.

5.  On 24 June 2008, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he completed 3 years, 3 months, and 26 days of creditable active service.  Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) shows the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal and the Army Service Ribbon.  Item 18 (Remarks) shows no deployments or overseas service.

6.  On 2 April 2010, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge.

7.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), paragraph 2-4 furnishes the instructions for completion of the DD Form 214.  It provides that Item 18 (Remarks) is to include the following:

For a Reserve Soldier ordered to active duty and deployed to a foreign country, enter the following three statements in succession.  However, for an active duty Soldier deployed with his or her unit during their continuous period of active service, enter only the second statement.)  (1) “ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY IN SUPPORT OF (OPERATION NAME) PER 10 USC (applicable section).  (2) “SERVICE IN (NAME OF COUNTRY DEPLOYED) FROM (inclusive dates for example, YYYYMMDD -YYYYMMDD).”  (3) “SOLDIER COMPLETED PERIOD FOR WHICH ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY FOR PURPOSE OF POST-SERVICE BENEFITS AND ENTITLEMENTS.”


8.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel and provides in:

	a.  Chapter 10 that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, submit a request for 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.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

	b.  Paragraph 3-7a that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.

	c.  Paragraph 3-7b that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There applicant requests that his entire record be considered and asserts that he fought for his country.  However, there is no indication of either significant awards and decorations or a combat deployment in his available service records.

2.  The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.

3.  The applicant's request for a chapter 10 discharge, even after appropriate and proper consultation with a military lawyer, tends to show he wished to avoid the court-martial and the punitive discharge that he might have received.  Thus, his misconduct and his actions to avoid the consequences became the determining factor in the characterization of his service. 

4.  In view of the foregoing there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X____  ___X ___  ___X____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.




      _______ _ X _______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110013934





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110013934



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1