Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/09/29	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that the narrative reason for his discharge is pattern of misconduct, which is attributable to the symptoms of PTSD.  He has been awarded a VA disability due to PTSD.  Documentation found his service and medical record correlate to the diagnostic attributes found in his VA records.  Additionally, the length of his original obligation was nearly complete at the time of his discharge.

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: 050808
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 050915   Chapter: 14-12b     AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: Alpha Company, 67th Signal Battalion, 93d Signal Brigade, Fort Gordon, GA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 041229, disrespectful in language toward SGT F, by saying to him “Don’t fucking look at me like that, I don’t give a fuck about you,” (041208); wrongful use of provoking words towards SGT F, “You want to fight, let’s go right now,” (041208); reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $349.00 pay per month for one month, extra duty for 14 days, restriction for 14 days, (CG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 020219    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	3  Yrs, 6 Mos, 27 Days ?????
Total Service:  		3  Yrs, 6 Mos, 27 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 25Q10 MULTICH TRANS OP/MNT   GT: 111   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea, SWA   Combat: Iraq (040101 - 050210)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR X 2, GWOTEM, GWOTSM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 8 August 2005, 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 misconduct, for deliberate misconduct that extended from an Article 15 for disrespect to noncommissioned officers and provoking speeches and gestures, failure to repair and the imposition of two Bars to Reenlistment with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 9 August 2005, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board (was not entitled) and submitted a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 5 September 2005, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts 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 the applicant’s available military records, 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 his 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 analyst noted the PTSD diagnosis from the Veterans Administration and the disability rating granted.  However, in review of the applicant's entire service record, the analyst found that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  The record shows that on 14 July 2005, the applicant underwent a mental evaluation which indicates that he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong.  The analyst concluded that just because the applicant suffers from PTSD does not mean he doesn't know the difference between right and wrong or that he did not have control over his behavior.  There are many Soldiers with the same condition that complete their service successfully.
       
        Therefore, 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: 21 May 2012         Location: Washington, D. C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, VA disability award letter, and a DD Form 214

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

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




ARCHIE L. DAVIS III
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 AR20110019861
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages