BOARD DATE:	  12 July 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100030186 


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 upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. 

2.  The applicant states his discharge was the result of alcohol abuse for which he was never offered treatment by the Army.  He claims his experience in the Army left him with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder symptoms and a diagnosed depressive disorder.  He claims he did not want to leave the Army but the command chose to separate him.

3.  The applicant provides a third-party character reference in support of his application.  

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 February 1999.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 88M (Motor Transport Operator).  The highest rank/grade he attained and held on active duty with private first class (PFC)/E-3.

2.  The applicant’s disciplinary record includes his acceptance of non-judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 9 April 2002 for:

* being disrespectful to a commissioned officer
* willfully disobeying a lawful command from a commissioned officer
* willfully disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer (NCO)
* willfully damaging furniture
* being drunk and disorderly
* 
3.  The applicant underwent a separation physical examination and he was cleared for separation by competent medical authority.  The DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination) contains the entry “Normal” in item 40 (Psychiatric) and there is no indication in these documents that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical condition at the time of his separation medical processing.

4.  On 11 July 2002, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to process him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 14, by reason of misconduct with a recommendation for a general discharge.  The unit commander cited the following actions by the applicant as the basis for initiating the separation action:

	a.  Disrespect to a commissioned officer;

	b.  Failing to obey a lawful command of a commissioned officer;

	c.  Failing to obey a lawful order from an NCO; and 

	d.  Willfully damaging government property.

5.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel and he was advised of the basis for the separation action, its effects, and of the rights available to him.  The applicant elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

6.  On 6 September 2002, the separation authority approved the applicant’s separation for misconduct under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, and directed the applicant receive a general discharge.  On
18 September 2002, the applicant was discharged accordingly in the rank/grade of private (PV1)/E-1.

7.  The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued at the time shows he completed 3 years,7 months, and 15 days of creditable active service.  Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 shows the:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Army Service Ribbon
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar
* Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar

His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  

8.  On 1 February 2010, the Army Discharge Review Board, after consideration of the applicant’s entire record of military service and the issues he presented, 
including the issues he now presents to this Board, determined his discharge was proper and equitable and it unanimously voted to deny his request for an upgrade of his discharge. 

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides the policies, standards, and procedures for the separation of enlisted personnel from the Army.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating personnel for misconduct because of minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion, and AWOL.  

10.  Paragraph 14-3 of this regulation contains guidance on characterization of service for members separated under chapter 14.  It states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.  The separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record.  It further states a characterization of honorable is not authorized unless the Soldier's record is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization clearly would be 
inappropriate.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contended that his general discharge should be upgraded to an honorable discharge because the misconduct that resulted in his discharge was the result of alcohol abuse for which he was never offered treatment and post traumatic stress disorder symptoms caused by Army service.  However, the evidence of record confirms he was determined to by fully qualified for service and he suffered no disabling condition that supported his processing through medical channels at the time of his discharge, as evidenced by the DD Form 2808 on file that documents his separation medical examination.  If he had an alcohol problem, he could have referred himself for treatment.

2.  The applicant’s separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

3.  By regulation, an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of misconduct.  Clearly, the length and honorable nature of the applicant's overall record of service was the basis for him receiving a general discharge instead of an under other than honorable conditions discharge that would have normally been issued.  However, it is equally clear his record of misconduct clearly diminished his overall record of service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  Therefore, absent evidence that the medical problems he cites rendered him unfit for further service and/or were a major contributing factor for his misconduct, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support an upgrade of his discharge.  

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)                                         AR20100030186



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100030186



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1