IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	21 August 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130005099
___________________________________________________________________________

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 was both 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 that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to either honorable or general, under honorable conditions.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because there was no hard proof he committed the alleged crime.  During the time the crime was committed, his platoon sergeant and platoon leader were aware of his location.  He was with them at the company conducting physical training (PT) and platoon duties.  He needs an upgrade of his discharge because the jobs he wants to apply for require an honorable discharge.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			11 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:			Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				29 February 2012
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:				512th MP Co, Fort Leonard Wood, MO
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		10 April 2008, 4 years, 26 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:		3 years, 10 months, 21 days
h. Total Service:				3 years, 10 months, 21 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			SPC/E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		31B10, Military Police
m. GT Score:					94
n. Education:					HS Equivalency
o. Overseas Service:				Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:				Iraq (20100228-20110215)
q. Decorations/Awards:			ARCOM, NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM									ASR, OSR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		NA	
s. Performance Ratings:			None
t. Counseling Statements:			None
u. Prior Board Review:				No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 April 2008 for a period of 4 years and 26 weeks.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry with an equivalency diploma.  He served in Iraq, and earned an ARCOM.  He completed 3 years, 10 months, and 21 days of active duty service.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant's record does not contain a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet.  Therefore, the UCMJ charges against the applicant are unknown.  

2.  On 30 January 2012, 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.  

3.  On 10 February 2012, 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. 

4.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 29 February 2012, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 

1.  The applicant's Enlisted Record Brief (ERB) shows he was promoted to SPC/E-4 on
1 October 2010.  On 25 August 2011, he was reduced to the rank and grade of private first class (PFC)/E-3. 

2.  The documentation supporting the applicant's reduction in grade was not available in the official record.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were listed.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 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.  

2.  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.  

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of his characterization was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The available evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance.  The applicant's contention that there was no hard proof he committed the alleged crime cannot be validated.  There is no evidence identifying what offenses were charged against the applicant.  Further, at the time of his discharge he should have presented the mitigating or exculpatory evidence he now claims exists.  Additionally, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense(s), or a lesser-included offense(s), and his case will not be re-adjudicated by the Board at this time.  Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs.  This presumption is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity in this case and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge.  

4.  The applicant contends all the jobs he wants require an honorable discharge.  However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.   

5.  Therefore, the reason 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:  21 August 2013      Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA????? 

Counsel: None?????

Witnesses/Observers: NA????? 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  1	No Change:  4
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)		AR20130005099



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1