BOARD DATE: 1 July 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090021743
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 his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
2. The applicant states:
* he had no say in his discharge
* he believes his discharge should be upgraded to honorable due to psychiatric health problems he received during his duty in Iraq
* due to fighting in Iraq he became unstable
* he had problems adjusting to daily life
* he was hospitalized due to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and sleep problems (nightmares)
* he couldn't concentrate due to flashbacks of Iraq
* irritability caused his bad behavior
3. The applicant provides no documentary evidence in support of his application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 June 2006 for a period of
3 years. He trained as a cavalry scout. He served in Iraq from 13 March 2007 to 15 May 2008.
2. On 18 November 2008, the applicant's unit commander initiated separation proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (commission of a serious offense). He based his recommendation for separation on the following: numerous failures to repair, being drunk on duty, and assault. This recommendation indicates the applicant received nonjudicial punishment on 4 May 2007 (punishment consisted of reduction to E-1 and extra duty) and on 27 September 2007 (punishment consisted of extra duty). No other details are available.
3. The applicant consulted with counsel, waived his rights, acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a discharge under other than honorable conditions were issued, and elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf.
4. There is no evidence of record which shows he was diagnosed with any mental or medical condition prior to this discharge. He underwent a mental status evaluation and physical examination. He was found qualified for separation on 21 October 2008.
5. On 4 December 2008, the separation authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.
6. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 10 December 2008 with a discharge under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (commission of a serious offense). He had served a total of 2 years, 6 months, and 3 days of creditable active service.
7. On 29 October 2009, the Army Discharge Review Board upgraded the applicant's discharge to a general discharge.
8. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from active duty. Chapter 14, in effect at the time, established policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories included minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, and abuse of illegal drugs. The issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally considered appropriate. However, the separation authority could direct a general discharge if such was merited by the member's overall record.
9. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded to honorable due to psychiatric health problems he received during his duty in Iraq. However, there is no evidence of record which shows he was diagnosed with any mental condition prior to his discharge.
2. The applicants record of service included two nonjudicial punishments. As a result, his record of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
3. The applicants administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. He had an opportunity to submit a statement in which he could have voiced his concerns and he failed to do so.
4. The type of discharge directed and the reasons were therefore appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
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) AR20090021743
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090021743
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010215
On 9 August 2007, the applicant was notified his commander was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c due to misconduct commission of a serious offense with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was advised of his right to counsel, to present evidence in his own behalf, and to appear before a board of officers. On 16 November 2007, a board...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028670
On 20 May 2008, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge and ordered him discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct - commission of a serious offense with a general under honorable conditions discharge. On 30 May 2008, the applicant was accordingly discharged. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c of Army Regulation 635-200 with a character of service as under honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014412
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 | AR20130010245
The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for discharge. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 12 June 2008, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and an RE code of 3. However, after examining the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000312
An Army Substance Abuse Program evaluation cleared the applicant for administrative action. On 14 July 2009, the applicant's unit commander initiated separation action against the applicant for misconduct for using cocaine. On 9 March 2011, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007032
These records, in pertinent part, include a Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 13 August 2007; ten documents from Red River Hospital documenting the applicant's treatment from 17 July to 21 August 2006 and from 20 August to 17 September 2007; Headquarters, U.S. Army Medical Department, Fort Sill, Oklahoma, memorandum, dated 5 November 2007, subject: SGT [Applicant's Name and Social Security Number]; twenty-seven Standard Forms (SF) 600 (Chronological Records of Medical Care)...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022840
He also approved the commander's recommendation for discharge of the applicant and directed the applicant be discharged for misconduct based on commission of a serious offense and that his service be characterized as under honorable conditions. (b ) However, for Soldiers who have previously reenlisted without being issued a DD Form 214 and are separated with any characterization of service except honorable, enter the statement "CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM (first day of service...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012831
On 25 June 2009, the applicants immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct - commission of a serious offense. On 10 July 2009, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of misconduct - commission of a serious offense with an under other than...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010848
Counsel states, in effect, that the applicant was not properly processed for separation because he was discharged for misconduct and should have been processed through the Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) due to a bi-polar disorder diagnosis. On 23 July 2007 the applicant was referred to the Community Mental Health Service for a mental status evaluation due to his being processed for administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, following...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013377
On 10 January 2008, the applicant acknowledged the proposed separation action under Army Regulation 635-22, chapter 14-12c for commission of a serious offense. He waived the requirement for a rehabilitative transfer and directed the applicant receive a general discharge under honorable conditions. On 22 January 2008, the applicant was discharged accordingly.