BOARD DATE:	  4 December 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120009367 


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 that his general discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states that his commanders did not take into consideration the physical and mental injuries he incurred while serving in Iraq when they made the recommendation to discharge him with a general discharge.  He goes on to state that prior to his discharge he attended drug and alcohol dependency rehabilitation and he is currently in full remission of all dependencies.  He also states that after his discharge he was diagnosed by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) as having post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and required extensive surgery for a disabling injury, all of which contributed to his misconduct.  He continues by stating that because of his discharge he is unable to use his VA benefits to attend a trade school or university in order to establish himself in the workforce and has become a burden on the local economy.  He asks the Board to consider how combat affects Soldiers post separation and how one mistake can affect both the Soldier and his family.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 February 2002 for a period of 4 years, training as an infantryman and a cash enlistment bonus.  He completed his one-station unit training as an infantryman and was transferred to Korea for assignment to the Joint Security Area (JSA) at Panmunjon.

2.  He completed his 1-year tour and was transferred to Baumholder, Germany  for assignment to the 2d Brigade of the 1st Armored Division.

3.  He deployed to Iraq on 27 April 2003, was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 4 July 2004, and departed Iraq on 10 July 2004 for return to Baumholder.

4.  On 19 October 2004, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant by the battalion commander for the wrongful use of marijuana.

5.  On 24 November 2004, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation and was found to be mentally responsible.

6.  On 8 December 2004, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct due to his abuse of illegal drugs.  He also advised the applicant that he was recommending that he receive a general discharge.

7.  On the same date the applicant waived the opportunity to consult with counsel and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

8.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that he be issued a General Discharge Certificate.

9.  Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 25 January 2005 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, due to misconduct.  He had served 2 years, 11 months, and 20 days of active service.

10.  On 2 March 2010, the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge and contended that his discharge should be upgraded because he had undergone rehabilitation for both drug and alcohol dependence and had been clean for 4 years and dry for 2 years.  Additionally, he had married, had a child, bought a home, and had full-time employment building Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles.  After considering all of the available facts and circumstances, the ADRB determined 


that his discharge was both proper and equitable under the circumstances and voted unanimously to deny his request for an upgrade of his discharge on           8 November 2010.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and procedures for separating personnel for misconduct.  Specific categories included minor infractions, a pattern of misconduct, involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities, and commission of a serious offense, which includes drug offenses.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.  

12.  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's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  Accordingly, the characterization of his service was appropriate for the circumstances of his case.

3.   The applicant’s contention that his commander did not consider the effects his tour in Iraq had on him has been noted and appears to lack merit.  It appears that the commander did consider his overall record of service, to include his tour in Iraq, when he recommended the applicant receive a general discharge instead of a discharge under other than honorable conditions, which is more commonly issued.   Additionally, the applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application and the evidence of record that his misconduct was caused by his tour in Iraq. 

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request for an honorable 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)                                         AR20120009367





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120009367



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1