Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2010/01/15 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that she requests an upgrade of her discharge to fully honorable conditions. She contends that she was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) prior to deploying Iraq, continues to receive counseling and ongoing treatment. Also, she relates serving her unit to the utmost of her ability and was awarded an AAM for her selfless service and professional excellence. 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: 070705 Discharge Received: Date: 070801 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: 104th HQ Det 11, Fort Riley, KS Time Lost: AWOL for 105 days (070129-070513), surrendered. 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: 19 Current ENL Date: 070116/OAD Current ENL Term: 00 Years 565 Days Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 03Mos, 01Days ????? Total Service: 06 Yrs, 02Mos, 07Days includes 76 days of excess leave (070518-070801) Previous Discharges: USAR-010210-070115/NA (Concurrent Service) Highest Grade: E-5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92Y10 Unit Supply Spec GT: ????? EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, AFRM-W/'M" DEV, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant submitted a document that shows she completed her master's degree and is a kindergarten school teacher. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 17 May 2007, the applicant was charged with AWOL (070129-070514). On 17 May 2007, 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 that she understood that she 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 her own behalf. The unit commander recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 16 July 2007, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with 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 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 that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The evidence of record indicates that 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. By the misconduct (AWOL ), the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant contends that she was she was diagnosed with PTSD prior to deploying Iraq, continues to receive counseling and ongoing treatment. The analyst acknowledges the independent documents diagnosing the applicant with PTSD due to a longtime family situation. However, the record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The analyst noted the applicant's issue that she served her unit to the utmost of her ability and was awarded an AAM for her selfless service and professional excellence. Careful consideration was given to her entire service record, to include her prior service, and the analyst found that this service was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. The analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined in the document with the application. However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. Therefore, the analyst determined 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: 6 October 2010 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated (091228); Applicant's Statement; Letter, Portland Public Schools, dated (091013); two (2) Letters, Connection to Healing (Conexiones), dated (091030), (070122); DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated (030723); AAM Citation, dated (030816); and a DD Form 214, dated (070801). 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 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: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None 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 AR20100001218 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages