Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/09/30	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he is requesting an upgrade of his discharge because he suffers from PTSD; he had a sexual trauma and left the Army prematurely.  He would like to use his educational benefits.  Further he states that after his sexual trauma he was afraid to go back to the same doctor for fear of more attacks.  He was ashamed to let anyone know about the incident.

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: 081107
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 090113   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: A Co, Warrior Transition Bn, Fort Campbell, KY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080411, failed to report on two occasions (080327, 080326), reduction to E-2 (suspended), forfeiture of $352, 14 days of extra duty and restriction (CG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  23
Current ENL Date: 060822    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  17 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 04 Mos, 22 Days Entry date incorrectly listed on DD Form 214 as 060907
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 04 Mos, 22 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10/Infantryman   GT: 99   EDU: GED   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR

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

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 7 November 2008, 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 an Article 15 (080411) for two instances of failing to report; disrespecting and disobeying lawful orders and being disrespectful to NCOs on several occasions (between 080912-080918), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 9 December 2008, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement on his 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       The document in which the separation authority would’ve approved the applicant’s discharge is not contained in the record and the analyst presumed government regularity.

       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 the entire 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 analyst noted the applicant's issue about his desire to attend school and obtain his educational benefits; however, eligibility for the benefits of the 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.
       
       The applicant contends that his discharge was unjust because he suffered a sexual trauma which was caused by an Army doctor and which ultimately caused him a post-traumatic stress disorder for which he is now receiving disability from the Veterans Administration.  However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that he was unjustly treated or abused.   In fact, the applicant’s Articles 15 and negative counseling statements justify a pattern of misconduct.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity and he has not provided any credible evidence to document his contention about being traumatized by an Army doctor.  Further, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.
       
       Furthermore, 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.  
       
       The analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the diagnosis of PTSD outlined in the 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 record shows that on 11 September 2008, 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 but appear have suspicious behavior. The analyst concluded that just because the applicant suffers from PTSD does not mean he doesn't know the difference between right and wrong or that he did not have control over his behavior.  
       
       The applicant also contends that he should have been medically discharged with a disability rating; however, the analyst determined that Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition like solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct.  The applicant’s service was marred by an Article 15 and numerous offenses of disobeying orders and disrespecting non-commissioned officers.
       
       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: 14 March 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: PTSD documentation from the VA, DD Form 214.

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						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: 
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder





















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 AR20110021348
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages