Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/07/23	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant, states in effect, that he would like an upgrade of his discharge because it has been three months since he left the Army.  The fact is that he was admitted to the psychiatric ward in Landstuhl AMC and diagnosed with PTSD and major depression.  He is having difficulties finding employment, has no income, and is looking for some benefits.  He served his first term between 2004 and 2007 and rejoined in August of 2007.  He is currently being treated for depression and PTSD by the Veterans Administration.  

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: 100318
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 100421   Chapter: 14-12    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 547th QM Co, Vielseck, GE 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 091229, failure to report twice (091118, 091117, 091112), without authority left his place of duty (091117), disrespect in deportment to an NCO (091117), disrespectful in language to an NCO (091114), disobeyed a lawful order from an NCO (091115), being drunk and disorderly (091113), reduction to   E-1, forfeiture of $699 for two months, 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG)

080509, failure to report (080408), forfeiture of $314, 9 days of extra duty and restriction (CG)

080313, disobeyed a lawful order from an NCO (080208), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $313 (suspended), 14 days of extra duty and restriction (CG)

080501, suspended sentence of forfeiture of $313, was vacated based on an incident of failure to report to his place of duty (080408).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  22
Current ENL Date: 070823    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  13 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 07Mos, 29Days ?????
Total Service:  		06 Yrs, 08Mos, 27Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 040630-070713/HD
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92F10/Petro Supply Spc   GT: 81   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany, SWA   Combat: Iraq (080625-090921)
Decorations/Awards: AAM-3, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-4CS, ASR, OSR-3

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 18 March 2010, 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 receiving two company grade Articles 15 and a field grade Article 15, for being investigated for simple assault, pulling a fire alarm, being counseled multiple times for failing to report to his designated place of duty on several occasions, missing a random urinalysis, being drunk and disorderly, destroying government, and disobeying lawful orders by failing to sign-in and out  as instructed, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 23 March 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, understood his right to an administrative separation board, 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 31 March 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
       
       The record contains a Military Police Report dated 23 December 2009.

       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 repeated incidents of 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 applicant contends that he was diagnosed with PTSD and is being treated for it.  However, the record does not support the issue that the applicant suffered 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.  Moreover, the record shows that on 18 February 2010, 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 and there was indication that he suffered from any medical condition that required disposition of his case through medical channels.
       
       Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant’s issue about his request for an automatic upgrade because more than three months have passed since he left the Army.  However, the U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges.  Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge.  Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.
       
       Additionally, the analyst noted the applicant's issue about his inability to find a job; 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: 18 March 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 214 (two periods of service).

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 AR20100019509
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages