IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	26 June 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130003350
___________________________________________________________________________

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 general, under honorable conditions.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he needs an upgrade in order to receive Veterans benefits.  He was denied medical benefits for a medical condition that occurred during his second period of service.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			11 February 2013
b. Discharge Received:			Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				17 December 2010
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:				A Co, 554th EN Bn, Fort Leonard Wood, MO
f. Enlistment Date/Term:			25 August 2006, 6 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:		4 years, 3 months, 22 days
h. Total Service:				10 years, 5 months, 12 days
i. Time Lost:					None 
j. Previous Discharges:			RA (000706-030817), HD											RA (030818-060824), HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-5
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		12N2P, Horizontal Construction Specialist
m. GT Score:					88
n. Education:					HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				SWA
p. Combat Service:				Iraq (060814-071109)
q. Decorations/Awards:			ARCOM-3, AAM-2, AGCM-3, NDSM, ICM-								CS, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR, CAB
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		No
s. Performance Ratings:			Yes
t. Counseling Statements:			None
u. Prior Board Review:				No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The record shows the applicant enlisted in the US Army on 6 July 2000 and reenlisted two times.  His last reenlistment on 25 August 2006 was for a period of 6 years; he was 28 years old at the time and was a high school graduate.  His record indicates he served a total of 10 years, 5 months and 12 days which included a combat tour.  His record of awards and achievements include 3 ARCOMs, 2 AAMs, 3 AGCMs, and a CAB.
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence of record contains Special Court Martial Order Number 3, DA HQS, USA Army Maneuver Support Center, Fort Leonard Wood, MO, which indicates the applicant was arraigned on the following offenses:

	a. On divers occasions between 1 March 2010 and 20 August 2010, violated a lawful general regulation by crushing an snorting Percocet, a controlled substance
	b. On divers occasions between 23 June 2010 and 24 June 2010, violated a lawful general regulation by verbally degrading an initial entry training Soldier
	c. On 1 March 2010, wrongfully distributed Percocet, a controlled substance
	d. On 20 August 2010, wrongfully distributed Percocet, a controlled substance

2.  On 7 December 2010, 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.  The applicant indicated he understood 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 on his behalf.  

3.  The immediate commanders’ recommendations are not contained in the available record.

4.  On 9 December 2010, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 17 December 2010, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

6.  The applicant’s record of service does not show any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Five NCOERS for the periods indicated, the rater and senior rater assessments are as follows:

	a. 1 May 2010 – 9 December 2010, Needs Improvement, 5/5
	b. 1 May 2009 – 30 April 2010, Marginal, 4/4
	c. 1 November 2008 – 30 April 2009, Fully Capable, 2/2
	d. 1 April 2008 – 31 October 2008, Among the Best, 2/1
	e. 1 October 2007 – 31 March 2008, Among the Best, 1/1

2.  There are no negative counseling’s or actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.


EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: 

The applicant provided a Veterans Administration service connected decision that indicates a 30 percent disability rating for PTSD and a letter of denial also from the VA for a different medical condition.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None 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’s request for an upgrade of his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, the documents, and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  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 a discharge from the Army 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 applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the repeated incidents of serious misconduct that caused his court-martial arraignment.  

4.  The applicant contends that the Veterans Administration has denied him medical benefits for a medical condition that took place during his second period of service.  However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include medical benefits 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.

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: 	Records Review   Date:  26 June 2013  		Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: 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:		No Change
Change RE Code to:			No Change
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)		AR20130003350

Page 2 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1