Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/04/22	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states in effect, "I was diagnosed with PTSD in December of 2006.  The PTSD happened due to my deployment with the 2nd Bn, 5 Inf out of Schofield Barracks Hawaii, to Afghanistan.  Where I served as a combat medic from May 2004, until May 2005.  At the time I was treated at the VA in Topeka, KS.  The division psychiatrist (LTC Kinzie) recommended that I be medically boarded.  That process was initiated.  During the medical board process, my commander at the time (1Lt. Catudal) continued to tell me that I was malingering.  I was also sent to the hospital several times during this process.  I was arrested on suspicion of drunk driving, and the charges were rapidly dropped.  Lt. Catudal however used this opportunity to as leverage to get me chapted out the of the army rather than continue with the medical board.  During this entire process, I was still being treated for PTSD.  I have documentation from several doctors, the division psychiatrist, an organization in Washington DC, and my Senator.  All attesting to my service, and all trying to get me the help that I desperately needed.  LT Catudal however convinced the General that I was a bad soldier, and I was dismissed.  I am currently still being treatment for PTSD in Omaha, NE, and I have become a contributing member of society.  I would like my service to reflect that.  I believe that my mental status precluded those making the descions, to give me a fair assessment of the pain I went through for my contry.  I would also like to dbe able to use my GI bill to go to medical school, and become a doctor to help out people who may be suffering the same way that I had to."

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: 071130
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 071221   Chapter: 14-12C       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: 2-16th Inf Bn, Ft Riley, KS 

Time Lost: AWOL for 20 days (070206-070226), unknown 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): Date NIF, AWOL (070206-070226), reduction to E3, forfeiture of $403 for one month (suspended if not vacated on or before 23 July 2007), restricted and extra duty for 7 days  (CG)

070523 punishment imposed, reduction to E3, forfeiture of $403 for one month

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  24
Current ENL Date: 050916    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  4 months
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 03Mos, 05Days ?????
Total Service:  		5 Yrs, 06Mos, 23Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 020508-050915 HD
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 68W/Health Care Specialist   GT: 118   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii   Combat: Afghanistan (040421-050421
Decorations/Awards: ARCOMx2, GWOTSM, OSR, ASR

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

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 30 November 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for AWOL from 6-27 February 2007, feigned an attempt to commit suicide by stabbing yourself in the back with a screwdriver on 16 April 2007, in that you made another suicide threat on 22 April 2007, you broke restriction and received a DUI on 27 May 2007, you made a false statement on 30 May 2007, you feigned an attempt to commit suicide by stating you were going to slit your wrist while holding a screwdriver on 1 June 2007, you feigned an attempt to commit suicide by swallowing pills and pretending to pass out within 10 seconds of taking the pills on 6 June 2007, and on 11 June 2007 you blew .200% BAC after you had been given a direct order by the Commander not to consume alcoholic beverages , with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and did 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 11 December 2007, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged 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.  It states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor, and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service is so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.  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 entire applicant’s military records, and the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  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.  Before initiating action to separate him from the Army, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about the 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.  Furthermore, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the diagnosis of PTSD outlined in documents with his application.  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 applicant fully understood the difference between right and wrong.  Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the 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.
       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: 22 January 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

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						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080007773
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages