IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 April 2013 CASE NUMBER: AR20130000539 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he was having mental issues at the time of discharge from his prior enlistment while serving in Somalia during combat operations there. He felt unattached to life and unable to cope with his everyday duties as a Soldier. After his enlistment in the Army his wife died which he couldn't cope with and trying to care for his daughter and coping with his wife's death was unbearable for him. So he decided to run away thinking that it was the best, he even contemplated suicide and harming himself. He contends he is now 100% percent disabled by the Veterans Administration and is getting the help he needs. He understands the Board does not have to upgrade his service but would greatly appreciate if they would consider his Marine Corps record and his Army record and see this incident was his only blemish. He is a combat Veteran and would like the honor to have an honorable discharge from the Army like he has from the Marine Corps. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 20 December 2012 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 25 January 2002 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, AR 635-200 Chapter 10, KFS, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: HHT, 2/11th IN BN, Fort Irwin, CA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 5 March 1997, 4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 9 months, 26 days h. Total Service: 11 years, 3 months, 7 days (Includes the last period of service in the USMCR that's not shown on the DD Form 214 under review). i. Time Lost: 385 days, AWOL (000906-010925) j. Previous Discharges: USMCR-890913-900903/NA USMC-900904-940903/HD USMCR-940904-970304/NA k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11C10, Indirect Fire Infantryman m. GT Score: 110 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Hawaii p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, AFEM, ASR, OSR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: None u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 March 1997, after serving 7 years, 5 months, and 22 days in the United States Marine Corps and Marine Corps Reserve. He was 24 years old at the time and a high school graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11C10, Indirect Fire Infantryman. He served 3 years, 9 months, and 26 days of a 4 year enlistment and his record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The applicant’s disciplinary history includes accrual of 385 days of time lost for being AWOL from 6 September 2000 until he surrendered on 21 September 2001. 2. On 10 December 2001, 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. The unit commander and intermediate commander recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 4 January 2002, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the discharge with a characterization of service of UOTHC. The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 4. On 25 January 2002, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) he was issued shows he completed 3 years, 9 months and 26 days of creditable active military service. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: There are no negative counseling’s or actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a discharge order, dated 8 February 2005, which discharged him from the USAR Control Group effective 8 February 2005 with an honorable discharge. The applicant also provided a letter, dated 15 December 2012, in reference to his commissary and exchange privileges in addition to his online application. 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. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of his characterization of service was carefully considered. 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 during the period of enlistment under review 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 he had good service prior to the incident of misconduct. The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incident that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding 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 incident of going AWOL for 385 days. 5. The applicant also contends that after the death of his wife he had a hard time coping with the everyday duties of being a Soldier. The record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought assistance through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct. 6. The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. 7. 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: 24 April 2013 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 1 No Change: 4 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: No Change Change RE Code to: No Change 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 ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont) AR20130000539 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1