IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	15 July 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130000324
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge to be proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.



      
      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his mental status was not good because he suffered a head injury prior to joining the Army and he believes it played a part in his behavior.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			19 December 2012
b. Discharge Received:			Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				7 October 2009
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	  	In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, AR 635-200 								Chapter 10, KFS, RE-4
e. Unit of assignment:				C Co, 369th Signal Battalion, Fort Gordon, GA	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		15 July 2008, 5 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:		1 year, 0 months, 15 days
h. Total Service:				1 year, 0 months, 15 days
i. Time Lost:					68 days
j. Previous Discharges:			None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		25410 (Signal Support Systems Specialist)
m. GT Score:					100
n. Education:					HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				None
p. Combat Service:				None
q. Decorations/Awards:			None
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		No
s. Performance Ratings:			None
t. Counseling Statements:			None
u. Prior Board Review:				No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 July 2008 for a period of 5 years.  He was 18 years old at the time and was a high school graduate.  His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s disciplinary history includes accrual of 68 days of time lost for being AWOL on 3 occasions (090310-090323, 090508-090515, and 090612-090727).  
2. On 30 July 2009, a DD Form 458, charge Sheet, indicates charges were preferred against the applicant for violating Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) based on 3 AWOL offenses as outlined in the preceding paragraph.  

3.  On 30 July 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial and of the maximum permissible punishment under the UCMJ, of the possible effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions, and of the rights and procedures available to him.  Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.

4.  In his request for discharge, the applicant acknowledged that by submitting the request for discharge he was admitting he was guilty of the charges against him or of a lesser-included offense that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct discharge.  He also confirmed his understanding that if his request for discharge was approved, he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He further stated he understood that receipt of an under other than honorable conditions discharge could result in his being deprived of many or all Army benefits, his possible ineligibility for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration, and he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under State and Federal laws.  The applicant submitted a statement on his own behalf.  

5.  On 31 July 2009, the applicant was placed on excess leave status for a period of 69 days (090731-091007).

6.  On 22 September 2009, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade and issued a UOTHC Discharge Certificate.  

7.  On 7 October 2009, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  The DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) he was issued shows he completed 1 year and 15 days of creditable active military service.

8.  The record contains 3 periods of lost time for a total of 68 days.  The first one for 14 days (090310-090323), the second for 8 days (090508-090515), and the last period of AWOL for 46 days (090612-090727, surrendered.).   

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

There are no negative counseling’s or completed actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. There is one Article 15 which was prepared and signed by the battalion commander for an offense of AWOL (090508-090516); however, it was not executed because the applicant had departed AWOL once again.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: 

The applicant provided a DD Form 214 with his application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were provided with the application.  

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 provides 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 UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.

2.  Paragraph 3-7a provides 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.

3.  Paragraph 3-7b provides 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 RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade.  However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge.  

2.  The applicant’s request for a change in his discharge was carefully considered.  However, the evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of offenses punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.  It also shows that after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 

3.  The UOTHC discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance.  His record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority at the time of discharge and it does not support an upgrade to an honorable or a general discharge at this late date.  

4.  The applicant contends that medical issues contributed to his discharge from the Army.  However, the service record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  

5.  Therefore, the reason for the discharge and characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Record Review        Date:  15 July 2013        Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  0	No Change:  5
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		No
Change Characterization to:	No Change
Change Reason to:			No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Other:					NA











Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20130000324

Page 2 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1