Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2012/07/26 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states: "During my active duty I properly performed the duties of my MOS, and I was generally a good Soldier. The only blemish on my military record is when, in self-defense, I struck an NCO who had been habitually harrassing me. I feel that my inappropriate response may have been due to the adverse affects of stress, for which I now have a claim pending with VA for service connection for PTSD." 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: 120211 Discharge Received: Date: 120427 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial By Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: 2/82d Avn Regt (R), Fort Bragg, NC Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 18 Current ENL Date: 080715 Current ENL Term: 06 Years 22 Weeks Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 09 Mos, 13 Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 09 Mos, 13 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92Y1P/Unit Supply Specialist GT: 115 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AGCM, GWOTSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 31 January 2012, the applicant was charged with being disrespctful in language and deportment toward a noncommissioned officer (120104) and striking a noncommissioned officer in the face (120104). On 6 February 2012, 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 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 commander and intermediate commander recommended approval of a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The senior intermediate commander recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 28 February 2012, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed a general, under honorable conditions discharge. b. Legal Basis for Separation: 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. 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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issues, and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which 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 the applicant was aware of it prior to requesting discharge. The analyst acknowledges the applicant’s in-service accomplishments and considered the quality of his service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review. However, the analyst did not find this sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. The applicant contends that his misconduct may be a result of stress/Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. The analyst noted the applicant's contentions; however, the record does not support the applicant’s issue, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that his discharge was the result of any medical condition. The analyst determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the characterization of service and reason for discharge 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: 19 September 2012 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated 18 July 2012. VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review 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 Board Vote: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) X. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI. Certification Signature Approval Authority: ARCHIE L. DAVIS III Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board BONITA E. TROTMAN Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army Secretary Recorder ????? 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 AR20120014169 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 3 pages