IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 25 March 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140006775 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect, his discharge was due to him going AWOL from his unit. He contends, he was a good Soldier and did his job to the best of his ability. He states, when his tour of duty in Korea was over and was reassigned, he never received another paycheck. He states, he requested assistance from his chain of command but after months of no answers and the stress of working without pay, he decided to leave. He states, since his discharge he has had medical problems with his knee and foot. He was never told anything helpful to help resolve his situation. He left the military in order to find work. He decided to turn himself in after discussing the situation with his parents. He states, he was doing his part however, the military did not compensate him for the work he was doing. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 14 April 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 9 June 2000 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: HHB, 1st Battalion, 82nd Field Artillery, Fort Hood, TX f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 24 April 1997/3 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 11 months, 10 days h. Total Service: 3 years, 3 months, 15 days i. Time Lost: 64 days j. Previous Discharges: DEP, 970225-970423, NA k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 13F10, Fire Support Specialist m. GT Score: 89 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Korea p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: NA s. Performance Ratings: NA t. Counseling Statements: No u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 April 1997, for a period of 3 years. He was 19 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He served in Korea and did not earn any significant awards of valor or achievement. He completed 3 years, 3 months, 15 days of active duty service. His discharge proceedings were initiated at Fort Knox, KY. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The applicant’s disciplinary history includes accrual of 64 days of time lost for being AWOL from 18 December 1998 until his surrender to military control on 22 February 1999. 2. On 26 February 1999, a court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for violating Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) based on the AWOL offense outlined in the preceding paragraph. 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 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. 3. 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 submitted a statement in his own behalf. 4. On 4 October 1999, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade and issued a UOTHC Discharge Certificate. 5. On 9 June 2000, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) he was issued shows he completed 2 years, 11 months and 10 days of creditable active military service and accrued 64 days of time lost due to being AWOL. 6. The record shows 469 days excess leave from 27 February 1999 until 9 June 2000. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. DA Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 26 February 1999, reflects the applicant was charged with being AWOL from 18 December 1998 until 22 February 1999. 2. Charge Sheet, dated 19 January 1999, reflects the applicant was charged with being AWOL from 10 December 1998 until 14 December 1998 and on 18 December 1998 and remained so absent. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 31 March 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 of service was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicant’s record of service and the issues discussed 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 a good Soldier and did his job. The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incident that caused the initiation of discharge proceedings were carefully considered. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the 64 days of time lost due to being AWOL. 5. The applicant further contends he received no assistance from his chain of command for pay issues he was experiencing. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance through other available resources, such as his local finance office and Army Community Services, before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. 6. 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: 25 March 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) AR20140006775 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1