Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2010/07/14 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states: "I deserted my unit after returning home from Iraq. I feel that this war is illigal and it is my duty to refuse any orders that are illegal. I would like to receive help from the VA dealing with the PTSD symptoms that I have." II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 040913 Discharge Received: Date: 041020 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: HMSC, 782d Main Spt Bn, Fort Bragg, NC Time Lost: AWOL 86 days (040602-040822), surrendered. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 22 Current ENL Date: 030326 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 03Mos, 29Days ????? Total Service: 01 Yrs, 03Mos, 29Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92F1P/Petroleum Supply Specialist GT: 118 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (NIF) Decorations/Awards: GWOTSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Campbellsville, KY Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant provided documents which show he is attending college for a degree in Criminal Justice. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 13 September 2004, the applicant was charged with desertion, in that on 2 June 2004, without authority and with the intent to remain away permanently, absented himself from his unit and did remain so absent in desertion until 27 August 2004. On 15 September 2004, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 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. The unit and intermediate commanders recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 24 September 2004, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation 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. 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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. The applicant consulted with defense counsel, and voluntarily in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated or lesser-included offenses under the UCMJ. The analyst noted that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. Furthermore, the record does not support the issue that the applicant suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Additionaly, the analyst noted the applicants issue reference Conscientious Objector status. The record shows that the applicant was charged with desertion, in that on 2 June 2004, without authority and with the intent to remain away permanently, absented himself from his unit and did remain so absent in desertion until 27 August 2004. The applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, and indicated he understood he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Additionally, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include medical and educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill 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. Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 20 June 2011 Location: Chicago, IL Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: None VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst's recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: ????? RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: ????? Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20100019047 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages