IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 22 April 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140007487 ________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, to include his combat service, circumstances surrounding the AWOL and discharge (i.e. PTSD – avoidance behavior) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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 characterization to general, under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he served over six years of honorable service. The applicant contends, he had issues readjusting to life once he returned from deployment. The applicant contends, he got divorced, lost custody of his children and everything he had when he came on orders to Fort Carson. The applicant states, he saw a physician assistant at Fort Carson, where he was given sleeping and anxiety pills; PTSD was not diagnosed at that time. The applicant states, moving to Fort Drum, coupled with no place to live in the Fort Drum vicinity; he had a complete mental breakdown. The applicant also states, he restarted his life with a wife and kids and was able to seek psychiatric care for PTSD, anxiety, and sleep disorder. The applicant contends, he was not afforded the opportunity for an administrative discharge board or the opportunity to write a letter to the convening court-martial authority, which he believes makes the discharge process improper. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 21 April 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 13 February 2014 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: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1st Battalion, 32d Infantry Regiment (Rear)(Provisional), 3d Brigade Combat Team (Rear)(Provisional), Fort Drum, NY f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 24 July 2002/5 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 8 months, 19 days h. Total Service: 6 years, 10 months, 23 days i. Time Lost: 3,192 days j. Previous Discharges: RA, 980625-020723, HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11C10, Indirect Fire Infantry m. GT Score: NIF n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Iraq (030406-040405) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM x2, AAM x2, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWTEM, GWTSM, NOPDR, ASR, OSR, CIB r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: No u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 June 1998 for a period of 4 years. He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He reenlisted on 24 July 2002 for a period of 5 years. He served in Iraq. He earned an ARCOM, AAM, and a CIB and completed 6 years, 10 months, and 23 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Drum, New York. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet, which indicates that on 21 January 2014, the applicant was charged with desertion, in that on 12 April 2005, without authority and with the intent to remain away permanently, absented himself from his unit and remained so absent in desertion until 8 January 2014. 2. On 21 January 2014, 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. Further, 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 in his own behalf. 3. The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 4. On 3 February 2014, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 13 February 2014 with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 6. The applicant’s record of service indicates 3,192 days of time lost for being AWOL from 12 April 2005 until his apprehension on 8 January 2014. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: Three DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), dated between 20 November 2013 and 21 January 2014, reflects the following duty status changes: a. Present for Duty (PDY) to Absent Without Leave (AWOL), effective 12 April 2005, b. AWOL to Dropped From Rolls (DFR), effective 13 May 2005, and c. DFR to PDY, effective 8 January 2014. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: 1. The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 21 April 2014, and a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review. 2. The applicant provided the following documents: a. Unofficial ATRRS Transcript, dated 19 April 2014, b. Verification of Military Experience and Training, dated 1 October 2013 (5 pages), c. Promotion Orders to Sergeant, dated 17 September 2002, d. DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 17 May 2002, e. Awards and Badges, dated between 17 May 2000 and 14 November 2003 (6 pages), f. Two DA Forms 2166-8 (NCO Evaluation Report), dated covering the period of service from September 2002 through August 2004. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None 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 characterization 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 characterization 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 personal 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 PTSD was not a diagnosis at the time of his misconduct; however, was able to seek psychiatric care for PTSD, anxiety, and sleep disorder when he restarted his life. The service record contains no evidence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. 6. The applicant contends, he was not afforded the opportunity for an administrative discharge board or the opportunity to write a letter to the convening court-martial authority. However, the record reflects the applicant consulted with legal counsel on 21 January 2014 and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. Additionally, the applicant’s request for discharge specifically stated: (paragraph 3) “Prior to completing this form, I have been afforded the opportunity to confer with appointed counsel for consultation. I have conferred with counsel for consultation who has fully advised me of the nature of my rights under the UCMJ, the elements of the offense with which I am charged, any relevant lesser-included offenses thereto, and the fact which must be established by competent evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to sustain a finding of guilty; the possible defenses which appear to be available at this time; and the maximum permissible punishment if found guilty. Although he has furnished me legal advice, this decision is my own.” (paragraph 6) “I have been advised that I may submit any statements I desire in my own behalf.” 7. Therefore, the reason and characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. BOARD DETERMINATION AND DIRECTED ACTION After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, to include his combat service, circumstances surrounding the AWOL and discharge (i.e. PTSD – avoidance behavior) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 22 April 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 3 No Change: 2 Reason Change: 0 No Change: 5 (Board member names available upon request) Board Action Directed: Issue a new DD Form 214: Yes Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions 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) AR20140007487 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1