Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/08/22	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states:  "I entered the military on October 31, 2007, I was looking forward to a long career in the United States Army, but due to some unforeseen issues this wasn’t possible. I was stationed at Ft. Drum Army base for two months without much guidance and I deployed to Iraq on 05-03-2008, seven months into my deployment I had a hand injury and was sent home. I arrived at Fort Drum; my rear detachment didn’t initially know I was coming back and no one knew where my rear detachment was. Here I am hurt, depressed, having to deal with family problems, having a great deal of trouble sleeping and having gone through surgery killed my motivation. I felt alienated. I finally rejoined my rear detachment and could not get any answers as to what was going to happen with me due to my injury regarding discharge. I wasn’t even there when my unit finally returned to the State, I was on convalescent leave and was not living in the barracks; I rented an apartment, which I found out later I was not supposed to have. When I return from convalescent I felt even more like a black sheep because I had no contact with the guys I was use to being around. I was going through physical therapy and there wasn’t any physical training for me for months so my motivation was poor. I was informed I would be medically discharge, I didn’t know who to ask for help, in my mind I felt the others resented me for living off base and leaving Iraq sooner than everyone else along with the possibility of being discharged. I don’t know what else to do, I don’t know what the pattern of misconduct was, and I was trying to do the best I could under the circumstances. The reason for this request is, I would like to continue my education and have something to look forward to. I hope you look favorable upon me and grant me this request. Thank you, for your time and consideration in this matter."

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: 100114
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 100128   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: Rear Det, 3-10 IN Rgt, Fort Drum, NY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 091118, failed to report two times (091106, 091109), with intent to deceive provided a false statement (091104), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $700 for two months (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG)

091123, the suspended sentence of forfeiture imposed on 18 November 2009, was vacated for an additional violation of the UCMJ of failure to report (091120)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 071031    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  21 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 02 Mos, 28 Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 02 Mos, 28 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B10/Cannon Crewmember   GT: 96   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq 080503-081204)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Astoria Queens, NY
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 14 January 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconduct—for failing to report on multiple occasions (between 091106-091215), testing positive for marijuana (091106) and for providing a false statement (091104), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 14 January 2010, the applicant declined his right to consult with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a 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 of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 19 January 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 of this regulation 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, the documents, and the issues submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The analyst determined that 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 repeated incidents misconducted the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  
       
       The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  
       
       The applicant contends he is entitled to an upgrade of his discharge because of mitigating circumstances which contributed to his misconduct.  Specifically, he claims medical issues, stress at work and family issues at home resulted in his discharge.  While the applicant may believe his stress at home and work was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief from stress through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers.  Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct.  Further, the record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.
       
       Moreover, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Before initiating action to separate the applicant, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about his deficiencies, which could lead to separation.  The analyst noted the command made an assessment of the applicant's potential for becoming a fully satisfactory Soldier.  The evidence of record established that the applicant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome 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.
       
       Additionally, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's in service accomplishments which included a combat tour as stated in his application.  However, the analyst did not find the said issue sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  The applicant’s service was marred by a field grade Article 15 and numerous negative counseling’s for multiple violations of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice.
       
       Finally, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.
       
       In view of the foregoing, 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: 7 March 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: Yes

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: A self-authored statement























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: NA
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




EDGAR J. YANGER
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 AR20110017372
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages