IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 27 May 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140008349 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 the discharge to be 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 to upgrade the characterization of his service from under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he served honorably in Iraq. He encountered problems upon returning from Iraq, while going through a divorce. He made some mistakes trying to save his marriage. He was also suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 6 May 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 28 April 2010 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: Home Detachment, 1st Bn, 64th Armor Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, Fort Stewart, GA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 1 August 2006, 3 years, 17 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 6 months, and 5 days h. Total Service: 3 years, 6 months, and 5 days i. Time Lost: 60 days j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 19K10, M1 Armor Crewman m. GT Score: NIF n. Education: GED o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Iraq (071025-090228) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM; NDSM; ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 August 2006, for a period of 3 years and 17 weeks. He was 17 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED). He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 19K10, M1 Armor Crewman. He served in Iraq. He earned an ARCOM. He completed 3 years, 6 months, and 5 days of active duty service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record shows that on an undated memorandum, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct (serious offense) for the following offenses: a. receiving an Article 15 for being AWOL (090608-090725); b. being AWOL (091028-091204); and c. being AWOL (100104-100107). 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an under other than honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights. 3. On 13 January 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon his receiving a characterization of service of no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions. The applicant did not submit a statement on his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 4. On 27 January 2010, the separation authority disapproved the applicant’s request for conditional waiver and referred his case to an administrative separation board. 5. On 12 February 2010 and 1 March 2010, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. 6. On 5 March 2010, the administrative separation board convened without the applicant or counsel. The board recommended the applicant’s discharge with characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 7. On 7 April 2010, the separation authority approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 8. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 28 April 2010, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ, and an RE code of 3. 9. The applicant’s record of service indicates 60 days of time lost for being AWOL from 8 June 2009 through 24 July 2009; 28 October 2009 through 30 November 2009; and 4 January 2010 through 6 January 2010. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Article 15, dated 22 October 2009, for being AWOL (090608-090725). The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $647 per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty, (FG). 2. Negative counseling statements, dated 28 July 2009 and 22 December 2009, for being AWOL; failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time; and being recommended for separation. 3. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 9 December 2009, indicates the applicant was diagnosed with occupation and martial problem; a deferred diagnosis on Axis II and referred to see the medical records for Axis III; and occupational problems, marital stressors for Axis IV. The applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by his command with a recommendation for the applicant to return to the clinic for a follow-up treatment for his mild depressed mood symptoms and to address current stressors. 4. Memorandum, dated 20 January 2010, subject: Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, [the applicant], rendered by the unit commander indicates the applicant was charged with additional misconduct in an MP blotter. 5. MP Blotter, dated portion missing, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for conspiracy, false official document, forgery, identity fraud, impersonating an NCO, and making a false official statement. The blotter also provided a list of previous offenses. 6. Memorandum for the separation authority, dated 1 April 2010, subject: Administrative Board Proceedings [the applicant], rendered by an administrative law judge advocate found the separation proceedings to be legally sufficient and that there was no evidence of substantial legal error. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided DD Form 214 for service under current review; an approved recommendation for an ARCOM award; and a character reference statement, dated 12 October 2010. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant provided none. 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. 2. After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, and the documents and issues submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to general, under honorable conditions for the following reasons: a. Length and quality of service: The applicant served over 3 years and 6 months of his 3 years and 17 weeks enlistment, thus the preponderance of his service was honorable. b. The record confirms the applicant received an ARCOM for a tour in combat. c. The applicant’s report of mental status evaluation indicates he was recommended for a follow-up treatment of a mild depressed mood symptoms and current stressors. 3. This recommendation is made after full consideration of the applicant’s faithful and, generally, honorable service as well as the record of misconduct. The evidence of mental health issues in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service may now be too harsh and as a result inequitable. 4. In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the discharge is now inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. However, the reason for the discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. 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 the discharge to be proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 27 May 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA 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) AR20140008349 Page 2 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1