Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/09/16	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant's attorney states, in effect, that he requests an upgrade of his discharge to fully honorable and all benefits resulting from military service that were forfeited because of the discharge he received be reinstated.  He contends the unit commander had a vendetta against the applicant.  He further contends the applicant was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after being discharged. 

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: 100105
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 100129   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHC, 2-81st Armor Regt, Fort Knox, KY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 091028, assault upon a SGT by grabbing him, throwing him to the ground and choking him in retaliation for assault on him (091008); reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $784 pay x 2 months, extra duty for 45 days and restriction for 45 days, (FG).

090629, willfully disobeyed a lawful order by having a dangerous weapon in his barracks room (090616); reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $960 pay x 2 months, extra duty for 45 days and restriction for 45 days (all suspended), (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  20
Current ENL Date: 060726    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  18 Weeks/the record does not contain subsequent reenlistment contract; however, the Enlisted Record Brief (ERB) shows his expiration of term of service (ETS) as (120927). 
Current ENL Service: 	03  Yrs, 06 Mos, 05 Days ?????
Total Service:  		03  Yrs, 06 Mos, 05 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-060726-090904/HD
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 19K10 M1 Armor Crewman   GT: 119   EDU: 11 Years   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (071024-081204)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ICM-W/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, CAB 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Metairie, Louisiana   
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 






VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 5 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 a pattern of misconduct for having an unauthorized weapon in government quarters, failing to go to his appointed place of duty (090815-0908927); unprofessional relationship with a woman not his wife (090831); disrespecting a noncommissioned officer, and driving under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .098, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.
       
       On 7 January 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service 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 12 January 2010, 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 General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 2 September 2009, for driving while intoxicated on Fort Knox, (Administrative).
       
       The applicant's record contains a Military Police Report, dated 25April 2009, with additional offenses, persons and property related to the report.   

       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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents 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 the misconduct, 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 desires all benefits resulting from military service that were forfeited because of the discharge he received be reinstated.  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.
       
       The applicant's attorney contends the unit commander had a vendetta against the applicant.  Although the applicant's attorney alleges his unit commander had a vendetta against him, there is no evidence in his military records and his attorney has not provided sufficient evidence supporting this contention.  Therefore, this argument is not sufficient to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge. 
       
       Further, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       
       The applicant's attorney contends he was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after being discharged.   The analyst acknowledges the independent medical document submitted with the application indicating that the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD after his discharge.  
       However, the record does not support the contention the applicant suffers from PTSD and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.   
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined that 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: 27 January 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated (110913);  Attorney's Discharge Review Brief, three (3) pages, dated (110913); Chain of Command Review; two (2) DA Forms 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Articl 15, UCMJ), dated (090629), (091028); Letter, Applicant's Mental Health Treatment, dated (110805); Letter, Chief, Congressional and Special Actions, dated (111229), with four (4) Congressional Documents;  and a Letter, Chief, Case Management Division, dated (110923). 

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony 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: No Change
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None

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 AR20110019002
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 4 pages