Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/07/17	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he wants his discharge upgraded to general based on an undiagnosed mental condition of PTSD.  Because he was suffering from PTSD and one of the symptoms for this condition could have been his reason for using drugs and the effect of the drugs causing him to steal the play station.  He was not in his right mind and suffering from PTSD.  He was diagnosed with this while he was in the service but did not receive proper treatment and should have been afforded medical treatment and counseling before just being booted out of the Army and signing paperwork stating he understood and agreed to this type of discharge.  He was not in the right mental capacity to make that assumption and he was diagnosed with PTSD within 3 months post discharge.  

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: 090406
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 090417   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: 623rd Quartermaster Company, 7th Transportation Battalion, 82nd Sustainment Brigade, XVIII Airborne Corps, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: AWOL x 1, (080917-081013) 29 days; the applicant returned to his unit, pre-trial confinement (081015-090407) 173 days.  Total time lost 202 days.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080807, failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 2, (080717), (080715), reduction to Private (E-1), forfeiture of $314.00 pay per month for one month, extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG)

080222, failed to go to his appointed place of duty (071205), stole a NBC Mask of a value of less than $500.00, the property of the US Army (071213), stole a 4GB Apple IPOD Namo of a value of about $149.00, the property of a PFC (070816), reduction to the grade of Private (E-2), forfeiture of $751.00 pay per month for 2 months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG)

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  22
Current ENL Date: 041101    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  The applicant was retained in the servcie 534 days for the convenience of the government per 635-40 to complete his MEB/PEB processing in reference to his continued medical care.  His new release date was approved for (081031).
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 10  Mos, 27  Days ?????
Total Service:  		6 Yrs, 4  Mos, 12  Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USAR 020313-020515/NA
                                       RA      020516-040515/HD
                                       USAR 040516-041031/NA
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92R1P Parachute Rigger   GT: 114   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea, Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (050423-060422)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, GCMDL, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR, CAB
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 8 September 2008, the applicant was charged with wrongfully possessing heroin (080515), larceny (080813), stealing a motor vehicle of a value greater than $500.00, the property of a SPC (080813), stealing a cellular phone, the property of a SPC (080813); on 3 November 2008, the applicant was charged with AWOL (080917-081014), wrongfully using marijuana between (080802-080901), wrongfully using heroin between (080830-080901), wrongfully using cocaine between (080823-080901); on 4 November 2008, the applicant was charged with stealing a television of a value of more than $500.00, the property of a SPC (080814), stealing a guitar of a value less than $500.00, the property of a SPC (080814), unlawfully entering a barracks room with the intent to commit larceny (080814) and on 18 February 2009, the applicant was charged with wrongfully receiving a guitar, of a value of less than $500.00, the property of another individual (081114).  
       
       On 3 April 2009, 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 that he 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 his own behalf.  The unit commander and intermediate commander's recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 7 April 2009, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was 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 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, the issue 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 noted the applicant's issue that because he was suffering from PTSD and one of the symptoms for this condition could have been his reason for using drugs and the effect of the drugs causing him to steal the play station; he was not in his right mind and suffering from PTSD and he was diagnosed with this while he was in the service but did not receive proper treatment.  He should have been afforded medical treatment and counseling before just being booted out of the Army and signing paperwork stating he understood and agreed to this type of discharge.  The analyst noted the PTSD diagnosis indicated in the document submitted by the applicant and the disability rating granted.  However, in review of the applicant's entire service record, the analyst found that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. 
       
       Further, the evidence of record shows that on 21 April 2008, the applicant; who, after being advised of his rights and the advantages of remaining in an active duty status in the Army beyond the scheduled date of his release for the purpose of completion of his hospital care and or physical disability evaluation under the provisions of Chapter 6, title 10, and after duly sworn, deposes and says: that he was fully advised of the rights and advantages that may be available to him by voluntarily remaining on active duty in the Army beyond the scheduled date of his release for the purpose of completing his hospital care or physical disability evaluation under the provisions of Chapter 61, Title 10, USC. 
       
       The applicant further stated that he had been fully advised that if he elected to be discharged or released from active duty as scheduled, he would not after such discharge or release from active duty, be eligible for separation or retirement physical disability.  The applicant in consideration of the above, elected retention on active duty in the Army beyond the scheduled date of expiration of his term of service.  
       
       Additionally, the analyst concluded that just because the applicant suffers from PTSD does not mean he doesn't know the difference between right and wrong or that he did not have control over his behavior.  There are many Soldiers with the same condition that complete their service successfully.
       
       Furthermore, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       
       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: 21 September 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: Ms. Rosa C. Stewart
                 VAMC, Room A-163
                 619 S. Marion Avenue
                 Lake City, Florida 32025

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149 dated 10 July 2012 in lieu of a DD Form 293, medical records dated 17 January 2007, Department of Veterans Affairs Form 10-7131 dated, Compensation work sheet. 





  

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: No Change
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 AR20120013602
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 4 pages