Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/06/22	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states in effect that his PTSD was the cause 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: 100302
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 100406   Chapter: 14-12c    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: B Btry, 1-6 FA Bn, Fort Knox, KY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 060711    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 08Mos, 26Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 08Mos, 26Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B10/Cannon Crewmember   GT: 100   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Afghanistan (080630-090612)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AGCM, NDSM, ACM w/2 CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Corpus Christi, TX
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 2 March 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense for being convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol (100128), this being his second alcohol related incident in two years, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 4 March 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in his own behalf which is not in the record.  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 18 March 2010, 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 Military Police report dated 20 January 2010.

       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 submitted with the application, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  
       
       This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as the former Soldier’s record of misconduct.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the overall length and quality of the applicant's service to include his combat tour in Afghanistan mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record.  
       
       The record shows the applicant was discharged as an E-4, had no other adverse action in his 3 years and 9 months of service, and there was no indication he ever received any UCMJ action or was counseled for anything negative until the DUI on 15 January 2010.  Additionally, the record does not indicate he was ever referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) until 19 January 2010.  The applicant earned two ARCOMs as a junior Soldier which is a rare achievement for a young Specialist.  The analyst concluded that the applicant's preponderance of his service was honorable.
       
       The record does not support the applicant’s contention that he suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that his discharge was the result of any medical condition.  
       
       Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 11 August 2010         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: None

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 2    No change 3
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 AR20100017337
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages