IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 13 March 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140004858 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the examiner’s 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 did not submit any issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 18 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 5 December 2012 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: Creek Company, 2-4th Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, Fort Polk, LA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 29 November 2007, 6 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 4 years, 8 months, 10 days h. Total Service: 6 years, 4 months, 25 days i. Time Lost 118 days j. Previous Discharges: RA (060313-071128)/HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B20, Infantryman m. GT Score: 97 n. Education: GED Certificate o. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia p. Combat Service: Iraq (070905-081125)/Afghanistan (101031-111030) q. Decorations/Awards: AAM-2, AGCM-2, NDSM, ACM-W/2CS, ICM- W/ARRWHD DEV, GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR, OSR-2, NATO MDL, VUA-2, MUC, CIB, EIB r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 March 2006, for a period of 3 years. He was 17 years old at the time of entry with a GED Certificate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B20, Infantryman. He reenlisted on 29 November 2007, for a period of 6 years and was 19 years old. His record shows he served two combat tours, earned several awards which included an AAM-2, AGCM-2 and a CIB; and achieved the rank of SGT/E-5. He was serving at Fort Polk, LA when he went AWOL apprehended by civil authorities and returned to duty at Fort Polk, where his discharge was initiated. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The applicant’s record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. However, on 30 November 2012, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. The record also contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s digital signature. 2. The DD Form 214 indicates on 5 December 2012, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the Service, in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Further, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS i.e., (in lieu of trial by court-martial), with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. 3. The applicant’s record of service indicates 118 days of time lost for being AWOL from 17 July 2012 until 14 November 2012 until apprehended by civilian authorities. 4. On 3 December 2012, DA, HQs, Joint Readiness Training Center & Fort Polk, Fort Polk, LA, Orders Number 338-0317, discharged the applicant from the Army effective 5 December 2012. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. DD Form 214, dated 5 December 2012. 2. Discharge Orders Number 338-0317, dated 3 December 2012. 3. Two Enlistment/Reenlistment Documents, dated 13 March 2006 and 29 November 2007. 4. A DD Form 553 (Deserter/Absentee Wanted by the Armed Forces), dated 9 October 2012, indicating the applicant was wanted as a deserter. 5. A DD Form 616 (Report of Return of Absentee) dated 11 November 2012, shows the applicant was apprehended by civil authorities and transferred to military control. 6. Two successful NCOERs covering the periods from 2 March 2010 through 1 March 2012. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, a DD Form 214, four support statements (two handwritten) and congressional documents (three pages). POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any information with his 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 the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. 2. After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, and documents submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors which merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to general, under honorable conditions for the following reasons: a. Overall length of the applicant’s service: while the applicant’s misconduct is not condoned (i.e., AWOL for 118 days), the evidence of record shows the applicant served 4 years, 8 months, and 10 days of his current six year reenlistment. The applicant served a total of 6 years, 4 months, and 25 days, thus the preponderance of his service was honorable. b. Quality and combat service: the record confirms the applicant received several awards, specifically two AAMs, two AGCMs, and a CIB for combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. 3. This recommendation is made after full consideration of all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct. The available evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service may be too harsh and as a result inequitable. 4. In view of the foregoing, the characterization of service is inequitable and the analyst recommends the Board grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. However, the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. This action entails a restoration of grade to SGT/E-5. 5. The applicant did not submit any issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board. BOARD DETERMINATION AND DIRECTED ACTION After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the examiner’s Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 13 March 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify: NA Counsel: No Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 2 No Change: 3 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) AR20140004858 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1