1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 18 December 2015 b. Date Received: 21 December 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he does not want one incident to haunt him for the rest of his life. He served his country faithfully for three years and would like to be able to use some Veteran's benefits that may be awarded to him, In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 March 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635- 200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 6 March 2002 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 22 January 2002, reflects the applicant was charged with violation of the UCMJ, Articles 86 and 112a. (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Charge I: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, AWOL (with five specifications) Specification 1: 26 April 2001 to 30 April 2001 Specification 2: 24 May 2001 to 18 June 2001 Specification 3: 24 May 2001 Specification 4: 18 June 2001 Specification 5: 3 July 2001 to 3 December 2001 Charge II: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a, wrongfully use methyldiamethoxyamphetamine (MDMA), known as ecstasy, a Schedule I controlled substance. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 28 January 2002 (5) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 1 February 2002/ Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 March 2001 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 19K10 M1, Armor Crewman / 3 years, 3 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 18 June 1998 to 28 February 2001 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Four Personnel Action forms reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Confinement," effective 29 May 2001; From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 3 July 2001; From "AWOL" to "Dropped From Rolls (DFR)," effective 2 August 2001; and, From "DFR" to "PDY," effective 3 December 2001. Military Police Report, dated 30 May 2001, reflects the applicant was apprehended for driving while license suspended (civil); speeding 84/65 (civil); escape (civil); and, fleeing-eluding a police officer (civil). DD Form 2624, dated 28 June 2001, reflects the applicant tested positive for MDMA during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing conducted on 19 June 2001 Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms for failing to report to his appointed place of duty at time prescribed on multiple occasions; rehabilitation effort; court appearance; requirement to provide support for family; APFT failure; performance; and failing to pay a debt i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 152 Days (AWOL, 3 July to 2 December 2001) / surrendered to Military Authorities j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with his application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 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. The applicant contends the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire Army career. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant contends that he served faithfully and an upgrade of his discharge would allow him benefits. 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. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 March 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20160000324 3