IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 18 March 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140006539 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 to his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general, under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he was not paid for four months while in the military, which had an adverse effect on his ability to support his wife and child. The applicant contends, he informed his first sergeant, left base to find a civilian job, and then was later reported as being AWOL. The applicant states, he is no longer married and is homeless. The applicant contends, an upgrade will allow him to seek benefits from the VA. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 10 April 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 13 February 2002 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: 24th Transportation Company, 541st Maintenance Battalion, 937th Engineer Group (Combat), Fort Riley, KS f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 11 March 1999/4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 8 months, 20 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 8 months, 20 days i. Time Lost: 73 days j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 88M10, Motor Transport Operator m. GT Score: NIF n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: N/A s. Performance Ratings: N/A t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 11 March 1999, for a period of 4 years. He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He completed 2 years, 8 months, and 20 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Riley, Kansas. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which indicates that on 23 January 2002, the applicant was charged with the following offenses: a. violation of Article 86 (010905-011019, 011106, 011107, 011108, 011109, 011112, 011113, 011114, 011115, and 011116), b. violation of Article 112a, wrongfully using marijuana (010711-010727), and c. violation of Article 91, assaulting a noncommissioned officer (020102). 2. On 25 January 2002, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, 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 did not submit a statement on his own behalf. The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 1 February 2002, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 4. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 13 February 2002, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 5. The applicant’s record of service does not show any record of unauthorized absences or time lost. The applicant’s record of service indicates 73 days of time lost for being AWOL from 5 September 2001 until 16 November 2001. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Five DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), reflects duty status changes as follows: a. Present for Duty (PDY) to AWOL, effective 5 September 2001, b. AWOL to Dropped From Rolls (DFR), effective 6 October 2001, c. AWOL to PDY, effective 19 October 2001, d. PDY to AWOL, effective 7 November 2001, and e. AWOL to PDY, effective 16 November 2001. 2. There are two positive urinalysis reports contained in the record: IR, Inspection Random, 11 July 2001, marijuana 27 July 2001, marijuana (Type and code of urinalysis test is not specified) showing a level of 46 ng per/mL" for the 11 July UA and "showing a level of 49 ng per/mL" for the 27 July UA. 3. ASAP enrollment showing command referral dated 24 July 2001. 4. An Article 15, dated 27 August 2001, failure to go at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty on three occasions (010704 and 010806 x2) and wrongfully using marijuana (010611-010711). The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $521.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and an oral reprimand (FG). 5. One negative counseling statement, dated 19 November 2001, for failure to be at appointed his place of duty. 6. The Request for Pre-Trial Confinement dated 7 January 2002 and confinement order dated 7 January 2002. 7. MP report dated 17 October 2001 detailing applicant's arrest on a charge of battery. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 11 April 2014, and a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None was provided 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 his was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, the issue and document 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 contends that he was having financial issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. 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 before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. 5. The applicant contends that he is currently homeless and needs help. However, eligibility for the housing supportive program benefits for Veterans 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. Moreover, all veterans at risk for homelessness or attempting to exit homelessness can request immediate assistance by calling the National Call Center for Homeless Veterans hotline at 1-877-424-3838 for free and confidential assistance. 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: 18 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) AR20140006539 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1