IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 10 December 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20140001657 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 a general, under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he has been out of the Army for almost 15 years, started a small business, matured and is giving back to his community. He would like to receive some medical benefits due to the rising cost of insurance. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 22 October 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 15 November 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: HHC, 2-69th Armor, Fort Benning, GA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 27 February 1996/3 years, 2 months (Applicant extended his enlistment by 2 months on 18 February 1998) g. Current Enlistment Service: 4 years, 8 months, 1 day h. Total Service: 7 years, 7 months, 26 days i. Time Lost: 16 days j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 19K10, M1 Armor Crewman m. GT Score: 109 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Germany p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, AFSM, ASR, OSR r. Administrative Separation Board: NA s. Performance Ratings: NA t. Counseling Statements: None u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 27 February 1996, for a period of 3 years and extended his enlistment for 2 months on 18 February 1998. He was 21 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He served in Germany. He did not earn any significant awards of valor. He completed 7 years, 7 months, 26 days of total military service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Benning, Georgia. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The applicant’s disciplinary history includes accrual of 16 days of time lost for being AWOL for the periods of 990206-990207 and 990211-990226. The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects the period of 990227-991011 as non-chargeable time. 2. On 18 October 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 offenses for the periods of 1 February 1999 through 9 March 1999 and 9 March 1999 through 12 October 1999, when he surrendered to military control. 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 25 September 2000, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade and issued a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. The record also shows 394 days of excess leave from 19 October 1999 to 15 November 2000. 5. On 15 November 2000, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he completed 7 years, 7 months, and 26 days of creditable military service and accrued 16 days of time lost due to being AWOL. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Form 4939 (Characterization of Service Checklist for Administrative Discharge Actions), reflects the applicant had three periods of AWOL from 990206-990207, 990211-990308, and 990309-991011. 2. DA Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 18 October 1999, reflects the applicant was charged with being AWOL from 990201-990309 and from 990309-991012. 3. Orders Number 298-39, dated 25 October 1999, reflects the applicant surrendered to military control on 12 October 1999. 4. A memorandum signed by the applicant admitting to being AWOL from 1 March 1999 until 9 March 1999 and from 9 March 1999 until 12 October 1999. 5. Several personnel actions changing the applicant’s duty status from AWOL to present for duty (PDY), effective 10 March 1999, from PDY to AWOL, dated 10 March 1999, and from AWOL to dropped from rolls (DFR), dated 16 June 1999. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided an online application, dated 11 December 2013, and a DD Form 214. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant states he started a small business and is giving back to the community. 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, his military records and the issues 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 and it does not support an upgrade to an honorable or a general discharge at this late date. 4. The applicant desires use of medical benefits due to the rising cost of insurance. However, eligibility for veteran’s benefits to include medical benefits 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. 5. The applicant states he started his own small business. The applicant’s post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application; however, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. 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: 10 December 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) AR20140001657 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1