| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Ms. June Hajjar | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Member | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his uncharacterized discharge be changed to an honorable discharge by reason of physical disability and that all monies deducted from his pay as a result of two nonjudicial punishments be returned to him.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that instead of being railroaded out of the Army with an uncharacterized discharge, he should have been afforded medical help for his problem and allowed to continue his enlistment. However, he was discharged 1 week before his initial 6 months of service ended, when he could have received a characterized discharge. In support of his application he submits a copy of a statement from a doctor who indicates that the applicant is the son of a Vietnam veteran suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and as such meets the criteria for PTSD of childhood origin. He further opines that in coping with the stresses the applicant experienced in the Army, it aggravated his PTSD and caused him to decompensate.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army in New Orleans, Louisiana on 18 June 1999 for a period of 3 years and training as a food service specialist. He completed his basic training at Fort Benning, Georgia and was transferred to Fort Lee, Virginia to undergo his advanced individual training (AIT).
On 4 November 1999, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for failure to go to his place of duty. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $200.00, restriction and extra duty.
On 4 December 1999, NJP was imposed against him for being drunk on duty and disobeying lawful orders from two noncommissioned officers. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $479.00 for 2 months, restriction and extra duty.
On 7 December 1999, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him from the service with an uncharacterized discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct. He cited as the basis for his recommendation the applicant’s record of NJP as well as additional incidents of using vulgar language towards noncommissioned officers, indecent exposure, failure to wear the proper uniform, breaking restriction, failure to report for extra duty, cursing a drill sergeant and wearing earrings on a military installation.
The applicant underwent a mental status evaluation on 8 December 1999 and was deemed to be mentally responsible and able to distinguish right from wrong. He was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by the command. He also underwent a medical and physical examination and was deemed fit for retention.
The commander initiated the recommendation for separation on 8 December 1999 and after consulting with counsel, the applicant elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that his service be uncharacterized. Accordingly, he was discharged on 10 December 1999, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b for misconduct. His service was uncharacterized and he had served 5 months and 23 days of total active service.
Army Regulation 635-200 set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes the policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for various types of misconduct that included frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. It provides that action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate; however, that regulation also provides that personnel who are in an entry level status (180 days or less of active duty service, when separation proceedings are initiated) may be separated with their service uncharacterized. That regulation also provides that separation for medical reasons will not preclude a separation for misconduct and that separations for misconduct take precedence over medical-related separations.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.
3. The applicant’s contentions appear to be without merit. Not only was the applicant medically and mentally cleared for separation, there is no conclusive or persuasive evidence to show that his alleged condition at the time was the resultant cause of his misconduct. Therefore, given his otherwise undistinguished record of service, the Board finds that his contentions are insufficient to warrant relief in his case.
4. The Board also finds no basis to overturn or set-aside the nonjudicial punishments that were imposed against him and as such, the punishments will stand.
5. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
6. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__kak ___ ___ra ___ ____jh __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001061435 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/02/05 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UNCHAR |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1999/12/10 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, CH14 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | MISCONDUCT |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 516 | 144.2900/A29.00 |
| 2. 538 | 144.3100/A31.00 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130012499
Presiding Officer I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case. He completed 5 years, 6 months, and 3 days of active duty service. On 17 March 2004, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050008804C070206
On 30 November 1972, while serving in the pay grade of E-4, he reenlisted for a period of 3 years and assignment to Fort Meade, Maryland. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing period, has determined that the 3 year limit on filing to the Army Board for Correction of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021752
The applicant requests, in effect, his general discharge be changed to an honorable or a medical discharge. Chapter 7 (Physical Profiling) of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) provides that the basic purpose of the physical profile serial system is to provide an index to the overall functional capacity of an individual and is used to assist the unit commander and personnel officer in their determination of what duty assignments the individual is capable of performing and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080332C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 26 January 1976, the applicant's commander advised the applicant of his rights and preferred charges against him for the AWOL offense. There is no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140021376
In view of the foregoing, on 3 September 2014 the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members administratively discharged UOTHC and who have been diagnosed with PTSD by a competent mental health professional representing a...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130007220
The evidence contained in the applicants service record indicates that on 4 December 2009, 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 misconduct (serious offense). On 4 December 2009, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015267
He stated at that time that his discharge should be upgraded because up until the time he was discharged, his record of service was good and that he went AWOL when he was placed on orders to go back to Vietnam for a second tour. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must indicate that they are submitting the request of their own free will, without coercion from anyone and that they have been briefed and understand the consequences of such a request as...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130013126
Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 16 November 2010 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200 Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: 549th MP Co, 385th MP Bn, Fort Stewart, GA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 25 June 2007, 3 years and 24 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 10 months, 7 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 10 months, 7 days i. The evidence contained in the applicants service...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050007792C070206
The applicant requests that his records be corrected to reflect that he was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 1 June 2000 and that his subsequent reductions and promotions be adjusted accordingly, with entitlement to all back pay and allowances. Again, the reduction instrument is not present in the available records; however, they show that he was reduced to the pay grade of E-2 on 29 August 2000. Accordingly, he could not be promoted 2 months later to the pay grade of E-4 on 1 June 2000.
ARMY | DRB | CY2015 | AR20150004987
Since receiving treatment for PTSD and depression, his accomplishments have been consistent with his high standards, and the rest of his Army service prior to his mental health issues. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: An online application, dated 18 February 2015, a self-authored statement, copy of a report of behavioral health evaluation, letter from T.D, LICSW reference the applicants evaluation for PTSD, certification of vital record from the Department of Public Health, and documents from...