Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2012/01/31 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: 2011/11/02 I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he requests an upgrade of his discharge to honorable and a correction to his DD Form 214 that would reflect his foreign service dates and Iraq medals and awards. He served in Iraq between November 2009 and December 2010. 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: 110131 Discharge Received: Date: 110303 Chapter: 14-12c (2) AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: HHC, 3rd Battalion, 8th Cavalry Regiment, Fort Hood, Texas Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 101206, wrongful possession of marijuana (100501), drunk and disorderly (100501), reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $906.00 for two months (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG) Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 26 Current ENL Date: 070918 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 05Mos, 16Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 05Mos, 16Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 68W10/Health Care Specialist GT: 115 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Post Service Accomplishments: None listed with the application. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 31 January 2011, 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- commission of a serious offense for wrongfully possessing marijuana, and for being drunk and disorderly (100501), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 2 February 2011, the applicant waived legal counsel and did not submit any statement on his behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 10 February 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The applicant's record contains a Military Police Report, dated 6 May 2010. b. Legal Basis for Separation: 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 absence 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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. By his misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. Before initiating action to separate him from the Army, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about the deficiencies, which could lead to his separation from the Army. The analyst noted the command made an assessment of the applicant's potential for becoming a fully satisfactory Soldier. The evidence of record establishes that the applicant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome the noted deficiencies. As the applicant did not subsequently conform to required standards of discipline and performance, the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service. The record indicates that on 1 May 2010, the applicant was arrested for DUI, simple drug possession, unlawful entry, and disorderly conduct. These charges led to his general discharge from the United States Army. Later he was diagnosed by the Veterans Administration with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The analyst determined that inspite of his PTSD condition, it does not justify his actions of wrongfully possessing marijuana, being drunk and disorderly, because the the discrediting entries constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. This misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. Further, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that his PTSD condition did not overcome the reason for the discharge and characterization of service granted. The record shows that on 16 September 2010, the applicant underwent a mental evaluation which indicates that he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. 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. Moreover, the applicant provides a document that indicates that on 25 July 2011, the civilian court dismissed without prejudice the charges against him. However, Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that a Soldier may be separated when initially convicted by civil authorities, or when action is taken that is tantamount to a finding of guilty, if a punitive discharge authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts Martial or the sentence by civil authorities includes confinement for 6 months or more, without regard to suspension or probation. The analyst also noted the applicant's issue about his request to add his Iraq medals and foreign service dates; however, the correction the applicant requests to be made to the DD Form 214, does not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) regarding this issue. 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: 20 August 2012 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: Applicant's father. Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149, dismissal of charges document (110725), Order of the Combat Spur certificate, ARCOM award, and DD Form 214. 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 characterization of service was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge the Board voted to change the applicant’s reason for discharge, authority, separation code and reentry code based on the circumstances (as was approved by the separation authority) and directed that block 25, separation authority be changed to “AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c”, block 26, separation code be changed to “JKQ”, block 27, reentry code be changed to “3," and block 28, narrative reason for separation be changed to "Misconduct (Serious Offense)." Except for the foregoing modifications, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable. IX. Board Decision Board Vote: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 3 No change 2 (Board member names available upon request) X. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: Misconduct (Serious Offense) with corresponding SPD code of JKQ. Other: Change the authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c 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 AR20120002388 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 4 pages