IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 May 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140006553 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to general, under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he was 17 years old when he enlisted in the military and suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). He states, after his enlistment he was sent overseas and upon his return he did not know how to cope with his problems. He contends he began to self-medicate by using drugs and alcohol which led to his discharge. He states, he believes he should be able to receive some form of veteran benefits for his service to include use of the Montgomery GI Bill or Post 9/11 Bill and access to the VA hospital. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 14 April 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 28 October 2004 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: Foxtrot Company, 2nd Battalion, 7th Infantry, Fort Stewart, GA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 29 July 2002/4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 3 months h. Total Service: 2 years, 3 months i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 92A10, Automated Logistical Specialist m. GT Score: 101 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Iraq (030321-030824) q. Decorations/Awards: PUC, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: NA s. Performance Ratings: NA t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 July 2002, for a period of 4 years. He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He served in Iraq and did not earn any significant awards of valor and achievement. He completed 2 years, 3 months of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Stewart, GA. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), which indicates that on 23 April 2004, the applicant was charged with the following offenses of wrongful possession of a firearm and ammunition in his living space (031201), and wrongful possession of marijuana (031201, 031103-031202, and 040307-040406). 2. On 7 October 2004, 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 submitted a statement on his own behalf. On 12 and 13 October 2004, the unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 15 October 2004, 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 28 October 2004, 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. DA Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 23 August 2004, reflects the above stated offenses. 2. Military Police Report, dated 1 January 2004, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for wrongful distribution of marijuana, dealing in captured property, failure to obey a general order, wrongful possession and use of marijuana, and obstruction of justice. 3. CID Reports of Investigation, dated between 1 December 2003 and 29 December 2003, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for wrongful distribution of marijuana, dealing in captured property, failing to obey a general order, and wrongful possession and use of marijuana. 4. There two positive urinalysis tests in the record: PO, Probable Cause, 2 December 2003, marijuana IR, Inspection Random, 6 April 2004, marijuana EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 7 April 2014 and a DD Form 214. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any in support of his 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. 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, the issues addressed in 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 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 he was only 17 years old when he enlisted and was deployed six or seven months afterwards overseas. 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. 5. The applicant contends he suffered from PTSD and self-medicated to cope with his problems after returning from deployment. However, the service record contains no evidence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. 6. The applicant desires to use his veteran benefits to include the Montgomery GI bill and assess to the VA hospital. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill 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. 7. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 8. 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: 1 May 2015 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) AR20140006553 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1