IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 24 November 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20140001086 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 to be 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 married and his spouse was addicted to drugs and his son was taken into custody right after his birth. He was deployed for two months after his son was born and upon his return from Iraq his spouse was still on drugs and he was overwhelmed with issues from the memories of the war. He has since obtained custody of his son but having a hard time finding a job to help support him and provide for his family. He had a very good record when he served in Iraq; volunteered as a sergeant gunner and did what he was told. He feels that he wasn’t given the opportunity to obtain counseling and help for the issues he encountered upon his return back from Iraq. His family was in California and his support was very limited to a couple of friends and his NCO’s that knew and understood his situation; however they were moved from Fort Drum, NY, so he had no one to go to. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 10 January 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 8 June 2011 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: A Battery, 2ND Battalion, 15th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Brigade, Combat Team, Fort Drum, NY f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 23 February 2010, 5 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 3 months, 16 days h. Total Service: 2 year, 11 months, 22 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: USAR 080319-080616/NA RA 080617-100222/HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist m. GT Score: 92 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia p. Combat Service: Iraq (091218-100619) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, MUC, ASR, OSR r. Administrative Separation Board: NA 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 June 2008, and reenlisted on 23 February 2010, for a period of 5 years. He was 19 years old and a high school graduate. He was trained in military occupational specialty (MOS) 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist. His record documents the award of an ARCOM and he served a combat tour in Iraq. At the time his discharge proceedings were initiated he was stationed at Fort Drum, NY. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. On 14 April 2011, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for the following offenses: a. wrongfully used cocaine between on or about (101221-101228), and b. wrongfully used cocaine between on or about (110113-110120) 2. Court-martial charge were preferred against the applicant for violating Article 112a of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) based on the cocaine offense outlined in the preceding paragraph. On 18 April 2011, 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 did not submit a statement in his own behalf. 4. On 6 May 2011, the unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 5. On 24 May 2004, 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. 6. On 8 June 2011, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, with an SPD code of KFS and an RE code of 4. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. DD Form 458, Charge Sheet, recommendation for trial by Special Court-Martial, empowered to adjudge a Bad Conduct Discharge and a Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. 2. Two results of IR-coded urinalyses conducted 28 December 2010 and 20 January 2011 with both tests testing positive for cocaine use. 3. Field grade Article 15 issued on 16 December 2010, for willfully disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer (101018), with intent to deceive, made an official statement to a noncommissioned officer which was totally false (101123). His punishment consisted of reduction to Private (E-2), forfeiture of pay in the amount of $600.00 pay per month for two months with $442.00 pay suspended, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. 4. Company Grade Article 15 issued on 3 August 2010, for willfully disobeying a lawful order from a Captain (100707). His punishment consisted of reduction to Private First Class (E-3), forfeiture of pay in the amount of $423.00 pay per month, suspended, and 14 days of extra duty. 5. Two negative counseling statements dated between 10 January 2011 and 16 February 2011, for testing positive for cocaine. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a copy of his AmeriCredit Contract Status. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any with the 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 the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicant’s military records, the issue 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 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 at the time of discharge and it does not support an upgrade to an honorable or a general discharge at this late date. 4. The applicant contends he was married and his spouse was addicted to drugs and his son was taken into custody right after his birth. He was deployed for two months after his son was born and upon his return from Iraq his spouse was still on drugs and he was overwhelmed with issues from the memories of the war. While the applicant may believe his issues at home was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief from his issues 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. 5. The applicant contends he has since obtained custody of his son but having a hard time finding a job to help support him and provide for his family. The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 6. The applicant contends he had a very good record when he served in Iraq; volunteered as a sergeant gunner and did what he was told. The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of his 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 repeated incidents of misconduct. 7. The applicant further contends he wasn’t given the opportunity to obtain counseling and help for the issues he encountered upon his return back from Iraq. Before initiating discharge proceedings, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about his deficiencies which could lead to separation. The command made an assessment of the applicant's potential for becoming a fully satisfactory Soldier. The evidence contained in the service record establishes the applicant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome noted deficiencies. As the applicant did not subsequently conform to required standards of discipline and performance, the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service. 8. 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. 9. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 10. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the 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 November 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) AR20140001086 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1