IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	23 June 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130017691
___________________________________________________________________________

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 an upgrade of his discharge from under other than honorable conditions to honorable and authorized awards be issued and detailed on his DD Form 214 for his service in Kosovo.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was discharged for an incident that occurred while he was in basic training.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		23 September 2013
b. Discharge Received:		Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			5 February 2002
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:			632d Maintenance Co, 87th CSB, Fort Stewart, GA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	17 November 1999, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 2 months, 15 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 2 months, 15 days
i. Time Lost:				11 days 
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	92A10, Automated Logistical Specialist
m. GT Score:				96
n. Education:				GED
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 November 1999, for a period of 4 years.  He was 17 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED).  He was serving at Fort Stewart, GA when his discharge was initiated.  The record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements.  He completed 2 years, 2 months, and 15 days of active duty service. 



SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which indicates that on      7 January 2002, the applicant was charged with the following offenses:

	a.  failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 7 (010423,
010514, 010515x2, 010703, and 010716x2),

	b.  going AWOL (011012-011016),being disrespectful towards MAJ M.C.F., his superior commissioned officer by failing to address MAJ M.C.F., as Sir or Major,

	c.  using a threatening manner and demeanor in his actions toward him, and failing to issue a salute when he was dismissed, and

	d.  wrongfully possessing traces of marijuana (010817).

2.  On 14 January 2002, 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 own behalf.  The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an UOTHC discharge.  

3.  On 16 January 2002, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of UOTHC.  

4.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 5 February 2002, with a characterization of service of UOTHC under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of KFS and an RE code of 4. 

5.  The applicant’s record of service indicates 4 days of time lost for being AWOL from 20 September 2012, until his return on 7 October 2012.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Two DA Form's 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 13 October 2000 and 17 October 2000, changing the applicant's duty status from PDY to AWOL and AWOL to PDY.

2.  Article 15, imposed on 20 March 2001, for going AWOL (010206-010213).  The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1 (suspended), forfeiture of $243.00 pay, and extra duty for 14 days (CG).

3.  There is a positive urinalysis report contained in the record coded; IR (Inspection Random),       25 June 2001, THC.
4.  A Military Police Report, dated 18 August 2001, that indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for the wrongful possession of marijuana. 

5.  A Bar to Reenlistment Certificate, dated 22 October 2001.

6.  Eighteen negative counseling statements dated between 18 September 2000, and
22 October 2001, concerning dereliction of duty, missing accountability formation, not being at his place of duty at the prescribed time, actions unbecoming of a Soldier, monthly counseling, disobeying a lawful order, AWOL, a positive result on the company urinalysis, traveling outside a 250 mile radius, disrespect to a noncommissioned officer, and bar to reenlistment.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a two DD Form's 149 and a self-authored statement. 

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.  

ANALYST’S 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, the issue and documents 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 an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.  It also shows that after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge 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 that his discharge was related to an incident that occurred while he was in basic training.  However, the evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged for offenses that occurred while he was serving at Fort Stewart, GA and not Fort Jackson, SC or Fort Lee, VA where he received basic training and advance individual training.

5.  The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service record.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

6.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the 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:  23 June 2014        Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  No

Board Vote:
Character Change:  2	No Change:  3
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)		AR20130017691



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1