1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 24 September 2020 b. Date Received: 28 September 2020 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant’s Requests and Issues: The current characterization of service for the period under review is an under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable, a narrative reason change, as well as changing their separation and reentry code. b. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, they were pressured into taking a discharge. With many years to think about the outcome, the applicant stated they wanted to shed light on their discharge; however, additional details were not provided. c. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 4 October 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 1 August 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: On 9 June 2011, the applicant was charged for having been absent without leave (AWOL) on or around 20 March – 9 May 2011. (2) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant’s request for voluntary discharge under provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 June 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 June 2011 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 29 June 2006 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / High School Graduate / 97 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 11C1O Indirect Fire Infantry / 4 years, 8 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: (1) Two Enlistment/Reenlistment Documents provides that on 2 June 2006 the applicant enlisted in the United States Army Reserve in the Delayed Entry Program. * On 29 June 2006, they enlisted in the RA for 3 years and 16 days * On 3 December 2007, they reenlisted for a period of 6 years (2) The Enlisted Record Brief provides: * On 1 November 2007 the applicant promoted to private first class (PFC) * On 3 January 2009 the applicant was flagged for adverse action (AA) (3) Orders WW-060-1680, dated 1 March 2011, provides while stationed at Fort Wainwright, AK the applicant was ordered to deploy in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan to proceed on or about 28 April 2011. These orders were not executed. (4) A Deserter/Absentee Wanted report provides the commander completed an investigation notified authorities and sent a letter to the next of kin when the applicant was reported AWOL on 20 March 2011 and Dropped from Rolls, on 30 April 2011, to urge the applicant to return to military control. The remarks section provides the applicant was previously reported AWOL on 3 January 2009 and Dropped from Rolls on 2 February 2009. (5) Report of Return of Absentee provides the applicant was apprehended by civil authorities on 9 May 2011 in Lafayette, LA (home of record) and returned to military control unit (Fort Knox) on 4 June 2011. (6) A Record of Emergency Data Document, dated 6 June 2011, provides the applicant was married with two children. (7) A Charge Sheet, dated 9 June 2011, provides the applicant was charged with article 86, UCMJ, for having been absent without leave (AWOL) on or about 20 March 2011 to on or about 9 May 2011. (8) On 9 June 2011, after consulting with counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. In their request, they affirmed no one had subjected them to coercion, and counsel had advised them of the implications of their request. The applicant further acknowledged they were guilty of the charge against them or a lesser one and they elected not to submit a statement on their behalf. (9) On 9 June 2011, the senior defense counsel endorsed the applicant’s voluntary request for discharge acknowledging they were counseled on the possible effects of an under other than honorable discharge. (10) A Memorandum, IMSE-KNX-PMF, subject: Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Courts-Martial [the applicant], dated 14 June 2011, provides the Personnel Control Facility (PCF) commander recommended approval of the applicant’s voluntary separation request, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions and forwarded to the separation authority. (a) A Memorandum, IMSE-KNX-ZA, subject: Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Courts-Martial [the applicant], dated 11 July 2011, provides the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for voluntary discharge with a characterization of under other than honorable conditions and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. (b) On 1 August 2011, the applicant was discharged accordingly. A DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty) reflects the applicant completed 2 years, 7 months, and 20 days of net active service. The applicant has completed their first full term of service. * AWOL 11 - 21 February 2008 NIF * AWOL 3 January 2009 – 19 March 2011 NIF * AWOL 20 March – 8 May 2011 Apprehended by Civil Authorities * CCA 9 May - 4 June 2011 Released from Confinement * i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 2 years, 3 months, 24 days j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: The applicant indicated “PTSD” and “OBH” on their DD Form 293, however, no medical documentation was included. Additionally, On 18 June 2021, the Army Review Boards Agency requested the applicant to provide medical documentation in support of the PTSD and OBH claims on their application, as of date nothing has been provided. (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Application for the Review of Discharge (DD Form 293). 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code (Review of Discharge or Dismissal) provides for the creation, composition, and scope of review conducted by a Discharge Review Board(s) within established governing standards. As amended by Sections 521 and 525 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, 10 USC 1553 provides specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual trauma, intimate partner violence (IPV), or spousal abuse, as a basis for discharge review. The amended guidance provides that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD, TBI, sexual trauma, IPV, or spousal abuse, as a basis for the discharge. Further, the guidance provides that Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards will develop and provide specialized training specific to sexual trauma, IPV, spousal abuse, as well as the various responses of individuals to trauma. b. Multiple Department of Defense Policy Guidance Memoranda published between 2014 and 2018. The documents are commonly referred to by the signatory authorities’ last names (2014 Secretary of Defense Guidance [Hagel memo], 2016 Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Carson memo], 2017 Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Kurta memo], and 2018 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Wilkie memo]. (1) Individually and collectively, these documents provide further clarification to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. (2) Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. c. Army Regulation 15-180 (Army Discharge Review Board), dated 25 September 2019, sets forth the policies and procedures under which the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to review the character, reason, and authority of any Servicemember discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Servicemember’s date of discharge. Additionally, it prescribes actions and composition of the Army Discharge Review Board under Public Law 95-126; Section 1553, Title 10 United States Code; and Department of Defense Directive 1332.41 and Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. (1) An Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’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. (2) A General discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions and is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (3) An Under other-than-honorable-conditions discharge is an administrative separation from the Service under conditions other than honorable and it may be issued for misconduct, fraudulent entry, security reasons, or in lieu of trial by court martial based on certain circumstances or patterns of behavior or acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. (4) Chapter 10, Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court Martial is applicable to members who had committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service. The request could be submitted at any time after the charges had been preferred. Although an honorable or general was authorized, an under other than honorable conditions discharge was considered appropriate, unless the record was so meritorious it would warrant an honorable. After receiving legal counseling, the soldier may elect to submit a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. The soldier will sign a written request, certifying that they have been counseled, understands their rights, and may receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions. The following will accompany the request for discharge: * A copy of the court-martial Charge Sheet (DD Form 458) * Report of medical examination and mental status evaluation, if conducted * A complete copy of all reports of investigation * Any statement, documents, or other matter considered by the commanding officer in making their recommendation, including any information presented for consideration by the soldier or consulting counsel * A statement of any reasonable ground for belief that the soldier is, or was at the time of misconduct, mentally defective, deranged, or abnormal. When appropriate, evaluation by a psychiatrist will be included. (5) Chapter 15 provides explicitly for separation under the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army. Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom delegated. Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and early separation is clearly in the Army’s best interest. Separations under this paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary’s approved designee as announced in updated memoranda. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. e. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of “KFS” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. f. Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army, and Reserve Components Enlistment Program, governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard for enlistment per DODI 1304.26. It also prescribes the appointment, reassignment, management, and mobilization of Reserve Officers’ Training Corps cadets under the Simultaneous Membership Program. Chapter 4 provides the criteria and procedures for waiverable and nonwaiverable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: (1) RE-1 Applies to: Person completing his or her term of active service who is considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army. Eligibility: Qualified for enlistment if all other criteria are met. (2) RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waiverable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted. (3) RE-4 Applies to: Person separated from last period of service with a nonwaiverable disqualification. This includes anyone with a DA imposed bar to reenlistment in effect at time of separation or separated for any reason (except length of service retirement) with 18 or more years active Federal service. Eligibility: Ineligible for enlistment. g. Manual for Courts-Martial (2008 Edition), United States, states military law consists of the statutes governing the military establishment and regulations issued thereunder, the constitutional powers of the President and regulations issued thereunder, and the inherent authority of military commanders. Military law includes jurisdiction exercised by courts-martial and the jurisdiction exercised by commanders with respect to nonjudicial punishment. The purpose of military law is to promote justice, to assist in maintaining good orders and discipline in the Armed Forces. Article 86 (absence without leave) states in subparagraph being absence without leave for more than 30 days, the maximum punishment consists of a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 18 months. h. Army Regulation 630-10 (Absence, Without Leave, Desertion, and Administration of Personnel Involved in Civilian Court Proceedings) provides policies and procedures for reporting unauthorized absentees and deserters, the administering of absent without leave (AWOL) personnel and deserters, returning absentees and deserters to military control and the surrendering of military personnel to civilian law enforcement authorities. When a soldier returns from an absence that is or appears to be unauthorized, the unit commander informally investigates whether disciplinary action should be taken and if the soldier be charged with time lost. (1) Classification of an absence is dependent upon such factors as the following: * Order and instructions, written/oral, the Soldier received before/during absence * Age, military experience, and general intelligence of the Soldier * Number and type of contact the Soldier had with the military absent * Complete or incomplete results of a court-martial decision if any (2) An absence immediately following authorized leave is classified as AWOL. Should the absence subsequently be reclassified, the soldiers leave is corrected to reflect the reclassified absence, except if the absence is caused by the following: * Mental incapacity * Detention by civilian authorities * Early departure of a mobile unit due to operational commitments 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. a. The applicant requests an upgrade to an honorable discharge with their narrative reason, separation and reenlistment codes upgraded. b. The available evidence provides upon completion of IADT, the applicant reported to their first duty assignment in Fort Wainwright, AK where they completed their first term of service void of indiscipline. Official records show they were coded as AWOL in February 2008, received orders to deploy in support of OEF, Afghanistan on 11 March 2008; went AWOL a second time, where they were later apprehended; records indicate they were married with two children, however, an Enlisted Record Brief indicates “0” dependents. c. Upon being returned to military duty charges were preferred against the applicant for AWOL on or around 20 March – 9 May 2011. As a result, the applicant signed a request that shows after having consulted with counsel, to voluntarily and willingly be discharged In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial and elected not to submit a statement on their behalf. The AMHRR is void of a medical and/or mental health examination or other documents showing the applicant requested them. d. Army Regulation 635-200 states a Chapter 10 is a voluntary discharge request in-lieu of trial by court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions normally is appropriate for a soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier’s overall record during the current enlistment. For Soldiers who have completed entry-level status, characterization of service as honorable is not authorized unless the Soldier’s record is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization clearly would be improper. e. Published Department of Defense guidance indicates that the guidance is not intended to interfere or impede on the Board’s statutory independence. The Board will determine the relative weight of the action that led to the discharge and whether it supports relief or not. In reaching its determination, the Board shall consider the applicant’s petition, available records and/or submitted documents in support of the petition. 9. BOARD DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION: a. As directed by the 2017 memo signed by A.M. Kurta, the board considered the following factors: (1) Did the applicant have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, reviewed the applicant's DOD and VA health records and found psychiatric scripts. Nonetheless, there are no associated records or diagnosis/es for clarification. However, the applicant marked PTSD and OBH, which may be sufficient evidence to establish the existence of a condition that could mitigate or excuse the discharge. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. Per applicant assertion alone, marking of boxes without discussion or records, PTSD and OBH. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that although the applicant's marking of PTSD/OBH and psychiatric scripts are acknowledged; however, there is not discussion or medical records reflecting a diagnosis. Accordingly, a determination cannot be made. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? N/A b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant contends, in effect, they were pressured into taking the discharge. The Board considered this contention but determined that there was no corroborating evidence presented by the applicant and found the discharge to be proper and equitable given no mitigating factors. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, considering the current evidence of record. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the issues before the Board. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant’s contention(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s characterization of service because, despite applying liberal consideration of all the evidence before the Board, the applicant’s lack of mitigating behavioral health factors did not excuse or mitigate the AWOL offenses. The Board considered the applicant’s statement, record of service, frequency and nature of misconduct and the reason for separation. The Board found insufficient evidence of mitigating factors and determined the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. Therefore, the applicant’s Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge was proper and equitable as the applicant’s conduct fell below that level of satisfactory service warranting a General discharge or meritorious service warranted for an upgrade to Honorable discharge. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. ? 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL – Absent Without Leave AMHRR – Army Military Human Resource Record BCD – Bad Conduct Discharge BH – Behavioral Health CG – Company Grade Article 15 CID – Criminal Investigation Division ELS – Entry Level Status FG – Field Grade Article 15 GD – General Discharge HS – High School HD – Honorable Discharge IADT – Initial Active Duty Training MP – Military Police MST – Military Sexual Trauma N/A – Not applicable NCO – Noncommissioned Officer NIF – Not in File NOS – Not Otherwise Specified OAD – Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) – Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF – Official Military Personnel File PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE – Re-entry SCM – Summary Court Martial SPCM – Special Court Martial SPD – Separation Program Designator TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury UNC – Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC – Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA – Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20210006029 1