IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 23 August 2013 CASE NUMBER: AR20130011074 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 discharge from under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that he served in the U.S. Army for 5 ½ years. During his career, he spent 22 months in combat, received numerous awards, and made SGT within the first three years. He was diagnosed with PTSD in February 2007 and was placed on numerous psychological medications. His unit frowned upon him for seeking help. He took medication throughout his second deployment and had a severe time trying to adjust once returning to the states. He still wanted to be back in combat where he felt less stressed. He went AWOL due to his inability to cope. He was told by command that if he signed an under other than honorable conditions discharge, he would not get a court-martial. Later he was told by JAG that he could not receive a Chapter 14 -12c because he had been diagnosed with PTSD, insomnia, and major depressive disorder. He understands that going AWOL was wrong; however, he just wanted his mental anguish to be gone and not be humiliated by his chain of command. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 13 June 2013 b. Discharge received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 9 November 2010 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (AWOL), AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(1), JKD, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: HHC, 4th Brigade Combat Team (Rear) (Provisional), 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry), Fort Polk, LA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 4 March 2008, 6 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 8 months, 5 days h. Total Service: 4 years, 10 months, 17 days i. Time Lost: 337 days (090818-090820 and 090910-100809) j. Previous Discharges: RA (050120-080303), HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 25U20, Signal Support Systems Specialist. m. GT Score: 113 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (060306-061123) Iraq (071125-081231) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-w/CS-2, ICM- w/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, JMUA, NATO MDL r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 January 2005, for a period of 5 years. He was 19 years old at the time and a high school graduate. He reenlisted on 4 March 2008 for a period of 6 years. The applicant served a little of over four years which included a combat tour in Afghanistan and Iraq. He earned several awards including an ARCOM, two AAMs, and an AGCM. At the time his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Polk, LA. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES 1. On 6 October 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to process him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of misconduct; specifically for: a. for going AWOL twice for 337 days (090818-090820; 090910-100809) b. for getting arrested for two counts of aggravated assault with a handgun, possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia, and possession with intent to distribute (090612). c. for getting arrested for domestic abuse battery (100816). 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an under other than honorable conditions discharge and informed the applicant of his rights. 3. On 7 October 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement on his behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 4. On 3 November 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions discharge. 5. The applicant was separated on 9 November 2010, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(1), for misconduct (AWOL), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKD and an RE code of 3. 6. The applicant’s record contains two periods of lost time for being AWOL for a total of 337 days (090818-090820, surrendered and 090910-100809, apprehended). EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD 1. The record contains a Military Police Report dated 12 June 2009, for two counts of aggravated assault with a handgun, possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia, and possession with intent to distribute. 2. Military Police Reports dated 16 and 19 August 2009, for domestic abuse battery. 3. One NCOER covering the period 8 August 2008 through 1 May 2009. The applicant was rated “Among the Best.” EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT A DD Form 293 and DD Form 214. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None were provided with the application. REGULATORY AUTHORITY 1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. 2. Army Regulation 635-200, 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. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual. 3. Army Regulation 635-200, 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. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization. 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 record of service, his military records, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 2. The record confirms that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. By committing the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a general or a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by two AWOL offenses and and multiple criminal offenses. 3. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. 4. The applicant contends that he had good service which included serving for 5 ½ years, spending 22 months in combat, receiving numerous awards, and making the rank of SGT in three years. The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceedings 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 serious misconduct. 5. The applicant’s service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD); however, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. It appears the applicant’s chain of command determined that although he was suffering from PTSD, he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. Further, there are many Soldiers with the same condition that completed their service successfully. 6. The applicant contends he understands that going AWOL was wrong; however, he just wanted his mental anguish to be gone and not be humiliated by his chain of command. 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. 7. The applicant contends he was told by command that if he signed an other than honorable conditions discharge, he would not get a court-martial. Later he was told by JAG that he could not receive a Chapter 14 -12c because he had been diagnosed with PTSD, insomnia, and major depressive disorder. However, 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. 8. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 9. 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: 23 August 2013 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? No 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) AR20130011074 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1