IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  12 July 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120001197 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that his discharge be upgraded.

2.  The applicant states his discharge does not represent his honorable service in combat operations in Iraq performing perimeter and prisoner of war security.  He is unable to receive "trauma treatment" from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) due to the nature of his discharge.  He was not born in this country but was grateful to have been able to serve.  He regrets his actions that appropriately led to his discharge but he feels his inappropriate stateside action should not color his entire period of service and deny him medical treatment for stress (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)).

3.  The applicant provides no supporting documentation.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 April 2003, completed training, and was awarded the military occupational specialty 96H (Common Ground Station (Radar) Operator).

2.  The applicant served in Kuwait/Iraq from 20 September 2004 through 24 September 2005, reenlisted on 15 February 2006, and was promoted to sergeant effective 1 September 2006.

3.  During his first enlistment he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal, Army Achievement Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Combat Action Badge, Parachutist Badge, and the Air Assault Badge.

4.  The record shows that the applicant was charged with being absent without leave (AWOL) from 4 May 2007 through 17 September 2007 (134 days).

5.  The available record does not contain the separation processing documentation but does indicate that he 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.  

6.  On 21 September 2007, the applicant was placed on excess leave pending completion of his discharge processing.

7.  The applicant was discharged on 27 December 2007 in pay grade E-1 with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC).  He had 4 years, 3 months and 28 days of creditable service with 134 days of lost time due to AWOL and 98 days of excess leave.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was awarded several medals, including a Combat Action Badge, for service in the Middle East but does not record his period of foreign service or the country of that service.  

8.  The Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge and did not deem it appropriate to change his narrative reason for discharge.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  It provides the following:

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a states that an honorable discharge (HD) is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty.  

	b.  Paragraph 3-7b states that a general discharge (GD) is a separation under honorable conditions issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not so meritorious as to warrant an honorable discharge. 

	c.  Paragraph 3-7c states that a UOTHC discharge is issued when there is one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from conduct expected of a Soldier.  

	d.  Paragraph 3-7c(7) specifically addresses issuance of a discharge UOTHC issued under the provisions of chapter 10 of this regulation.
	e.  Chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  A discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.  

10.  Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR)), states the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity.  It will decide cases on the evidence of record and it is not an investigative body.  The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  During the applicant's first enlistment he saw combat action in Iraq and served with honor as documented by his awards and decorations.  

2.  However, shortly after reenlisting he went AWOL for over four months and requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial for this offense.  

3.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  

4.  The type and character of the discharge is commensurate with the offense and process in which he requested discharge rather than face trial by court-martial where the mitigation arising from his first enlistment could have been applied in deriving an appropriate sentence.

5.  Entitlement to VA benefits is not within the preview of this Board nor is it normally considered a basis for granting relief.  Further, the record does not contain and the applicant has not provided any evidence that he was suffering from a psychiatric, psychological, mental, or emotional problem at the time of his AWOL.

6.  Absent convincing evidence that, at the time of the discharge or the behavior that led to the discharge, the applicant was so impaired by psychiatric, psychological, mental, or emotional problems that he could not both tell right from wrong and adhere to the right, the PTSD issue does nothing to demonstrate an error or an injustice in the discharge.

7.  This action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation during his first enlistment.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of that period of service in arms.  
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X____  ___X____  ___X ___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      _______ _   X______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
       
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.


ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120001197





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120001197



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1