AR20140000487

IN THE CASE OF: Mr.

BOARD DATE: 3 December 2014

CASE NUMBER: AR20140000487
___________________________________________________________________________

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 APPLICANTS REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

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

2. The applicant states, in effect, he would like for his discharge to be upgraded. He made some mistakes when he was younger and has been trying to make it up every since. He is currently working for the government and would like to be able to change jobs.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 23 December 2013
b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 3 May 2001
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: E Troop, 1st Squadron, 16th Cav, Fort Knox KY
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 24 September 1998 , 3 years
g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 7 months, 9 days
h. Total Service: 3 years, 6 months, 11 days
i. Time Lost: 396 days, AWOL
j. Previous Discharges: RA (960917-980923), NA (Concurrent Service)
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 19K10, M1 Armor Crewman
m. GT Score: 108
n. Education: GED
o. Overseas Service: Korea
p. Combat Service: None
q. Decorations/Awards: AAM, ASR, OSR
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 17 September 1996, for a period of 3 years. He was 27 years old and had a high school equivalency (GED). His record shows he was awarded an AAM and served in Korea. He was serving at Fort Knox, KY, when his discharge was initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1. The applicants disciplinary history includes accrual of 396 days of time lost for being AWOL, on from 3 February 1999 to 4 March 2000. The applicant was apprehended.

2. On 14 March 2000, court-martial charges was preferred against the applicant for violating Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) based on the AWOL offenses outlined in the preceding paragraph.

3. On 14 March 2000, 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 charge 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 confirmed he had no desire to perform further military service and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.

5. On 15 March 2000, the applicant was placed on excess leave for 415 days (000315-010503).

6. On 11 April 2001, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade and issued an under other than honorable conditions discharge certificate.

7. On 3 May 2001, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) he was issued shows he completed 3 years, 6 months and 11 days of creditable active military service and accrued 396 days of time lost due to being AWOL.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD:

1. A DD Form 616, Report of Return of Absentee, dated 3 March 2000.

2. A DD Form 458, charge sheet, dated 14 March 2000.

3. There are no negative counselings or actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, DD Form 214, and a certificate of recognition for government service.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

The applicant contends he is working for the government.

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 applicants request for an upgrade of his discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicants record of service, the issues 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 shows he was awarded an AAM; however, 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 general discharge at this late date.

4. The applicant contends that he was young and made some mistakes and would like to pursue another government job. However, the record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. Further, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

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: 3 December 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) AR20140000487

Page 4 of 5 pages

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

1