Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/01/25	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states:  "I am fine with the General Under Honorable because I know what kind of soldier I am and I need no approval or judgment from anyone who can't understand that the ideal soldier is not a threat but the most ready and capable soldier that's ever come across. I've gotten a characteristic that says "Patterns of Misconduct". Now Infantry is the only dream I ever had. I finally was content with that because I decided I wanted to work for the VA as a PTSD Social Worker to help support returning troops. This requires a 4 year degree and when I applied I was denied. They are fine with General Under Honorable Conditions but when it came to my Characteristic they had said that it can't be anything misconduct like or bad and so I may help fellow veterans and be happy doing something good for the service instead of not going to school and just feeling like I was screwed over.  I am not sending this in order to bark at the army. I am writing this because I know in my heart and I know there are soldiers out there that know that my Discharge Characteristic{Patterns Of Misconduct) doesn't fit me at all or my performance. I strongly feel that just because I went to the Psychologist as ordered and she mentioned that I have PTSD that it doesn't make me a bad soldier until you let it affect  your performance. I was almost complete with A-Noc in process  (1 week left) and B-Noc complete. My E-6 board was just around the corner. To me that sounds like a soldier that is committed to every aspect of the Army. All I ask is that I am able to change my characteristic so I will be able to help the big fights but in a different way.  Because I am not griping or screaming.  I am calming stating that I love the Army and this is my only option left to be able to be a part of it.  By helping and counseling soldiers upon their return from war time so they don't just need to talk to a Shrink but they can work with someone who can relate to their issues allowing a lot more openness and a lot more trust so we can get these boys help before they get scared and mess up their and others lives.”?????

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: 060215
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060307   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: A Co, 2-12 IN Bn, Fort Carson, CO 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060126, failure to report to his designated place of duty (051101), reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $874 for two months, 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  17
Current ENL Date: 030129    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 01Mos, 09Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 01Mos, 09Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10/Infantryman   GT: NIF   EDU: GED   Overseas: Korea, SWA   Combat: Iraq (040815-050726)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, AGCM, KDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, CIB, NATO MDL

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 15 February 2006, 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 to his designated place of duty, disrespecting an NCO (051201), driving under the influence, drinking alcoholic beverages while under the age of 21, and disobeying the lawful order of an NCO (060123), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 16 February 2006, 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 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 23 February 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
       
       The record contains a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated 23 February 2006.

       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, and the issue 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 analyst acknowledges the applicant's in service accomplishments including a tour in Iraq, 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.  
       
       He further states that he suffers from PTSD; however the record does not support the issue that the applicant suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  
       
       Additionally, the applicant contends that he wants to rejoin the team again  but as part of the Veterans Administration.  However, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       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: 20 October 2010         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 149, 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						
	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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA











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 AR20100007467
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages