IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	14 May 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130015882
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the analyst’s 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 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.  He requests a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, an under other than honorable conditions discharge is issued for civil court cases, his case was not a civil court case.  The discharge he received makes it hard to support his family.  He desires another chance to fix his mistake.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		26 August 2013
b. Discharge Received:		Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			1 September 2011
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:			Rear Detachment, 3-16th Field Artillery Battalion, 2nd 						Brigade Combat Team, Fort Carson, CO
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	18 September 2007, 3 years and 17 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 4 months, 8 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 2 months, 26 days
i. Time Lost:				948 days
j. Previous Discharges:		USAR (061030-070917)/NA
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	13B10, Cannon Crewmember
m. GT Score:				95
n. Education:				GED Certificate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		No
t. Counseling Statements:		No
u. Prior Board Review:			No







SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the US Army Reserved on 30 October 2006 for a period of 8 years.  He was 17 years old at the time of entry with a GED Certificate.  He was discharged on          17 September 2006 to enlist in the Regularly Army.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army 17 September 2006, for a period of 3 years and 17 weeks and was 18 years old at the time of entry with a GED Certificate.  His record does not show he earned any awards for acts of valor or meritorious achievement; and achieved the rank of PV2/E-2.  He was serving at Fort Carson, CO when his discharge was initiated.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which indicates that on      21 July 2011, the applicant was charged with the following offenses of absenting himself from his unit and remaining absent in desertion x 2 (080605-100707), and (101002-110401).

2.  On 8 August 2011, 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 record indicated the applicant did not submit a statement on his behalf.  The applicant’s chain of command recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 18 August 2011, 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 1 September 2011, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 10,             AR 635-200, by reason of in lieu of trial by court-martial, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of KFS and an RE code of 4.

5.  The applicant’s record of service does not contain any negative counseling statements or actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

6.  The applicant’s record of service indicates 948 days of time lost for being in desertion x 2 from 7 June 2008 until 6 July 2010, for 761 days, mode of return unknown; confinement military authorities from 7 July 2010 until 12 July 2010, for 5 days; also desertion from              2 October 2010 until 31 March 2011, for 181 days, mode of return unknown; confinement civil authorities from 1 April 2011 until 1 April 2011, for 1 day. 




EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  The record of evidence contains nine DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), dated between         25 June 2010 and 18 May 2011, which indicated the present for duty, AWOL, dropped from rolls, confinement dates.

2.  The record of evidence also contains a DD Form 553 (Deserter/Absentee Wanted by the Armed Force, dated 25 June 2010 indicated the applicant was AWOL.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 149, a DD Form 214, photocopy of marriage certificate, letter of recommendation, self-authored statement, and a letter, Arvada Police Department.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any information with the application.

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.  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.  

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.  Army Regulation 635-200, 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.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.






ANALYST’S 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.  He requests a change to the RE code.

2.  The 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.  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 and it does not support an upgrade to an honorable or a general discharge at this late date.  

4.  The applicant contends an under other than honorable conditions discharge is issued for civil court cases, his case was not a civil court case.  AWOL is serious misconduct and Army policy states that a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate under the provisions of Chapter 10.

5.  The applicant further contends the discharge he received makes it hard to support his family.  The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

6.  The applicant desires another chance to fix his mistake.  Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 4.  An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the RE code.

7.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

8.  Therefore, the reason and characterization of service to include the RE code being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief.



SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review       Date:  14 May 2014       Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA 

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)		AR20130015882



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1