IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	7 June 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120022314
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation that follows, the Board determined that the applicant's length and quality of his service including his combat service were not significantly meritorious to overcome the seriousness of the misconduct that caused his separation from the Army, and as a result the discharge was found to be proper and equitable.  The Board voted to deny the relief requested because it found the nature of the applicant's misconduct of failure to report to his appointed place of duty x 13, and failure to obey a lawful order, does not warrant the award of an honorable characterization of service.  The Board further determined the applicant’s record does not support the issue that he suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.  





      
      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge from general under honorable conditions, to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was unfair because of his medical condition, that occurred after serving in Iraq.  The condition (sleep disorder) caused him to be late or miss formations.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		29 November 2012
b. Discharge received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			14 July 2006
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, 						JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			HHC, 1 -68th Armor Battalion (Rear) (Provisional), 3d 						Brigade Combat Team(Rear) (Provisional), Fort 						Carson, CO
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	30 August 2004, 4 years 		
g. Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 10 months, 15 days
h. Total Service:			4 years, 10 months, 22 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA (010823-040829), HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	25Q10, Multi-Channel Transmissions systems 							Operator
m. GT Score:				110
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Germany, Iraq
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (030313-030708)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, 						NPDR, ASR, OSR 
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 August 2001, he was 19 years old at the time of entry and had a high school diploma.  On 30 August 2004, he reenlisted in the Army for four years.  His record shows he achieved the rank of Specialist, served in Iraq, and received an ARCOM and AGCM.  He served a total of 4 years, 10 months and 22 days on active duty.
   

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 15 June 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200.  Specifically for the following offenses:  

a. failure to report to his appointed place of duty x 13  (060426, 050718, 050303, 050304, 050424, 050425, 050501, 050510, 050519, 050522, 00523, 050524, and 060608)

b. failure to obey a lawful order (050705)

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 20 June 2006, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and submitted a statement on his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 10 July 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 14 July 2006, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for a pattern of misconduct, a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKA and an RE code of 3. 

6.  The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  On 27 September 2004, the applicant graduated (exceeded the course standards) from the Primary Leadership Development Course.

2.  Company Grade Article 15 imposed on 30 June 2005, for failing to report to his appointed place of duty (060303).  His punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-3, suspended. 

3.  On 3 August 2005, the suspension of punishment of reduction to E-3 was vacated for a new offense of failing to physically sign out on leave at the staff duty desk.

4.  Field Grade Article 15 imposed on 16 March 2006, for failing to report to his appointed place of duty x 5 (050126, 050207, 050614, 050614, and 050616).  His punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-2, suspended; forfeiture of $713.00 pay, suspended, and extra duty for 45 days, suspended.

5.  On 13 May 2006, the suspension of punishment of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $713.00 pay, and extra duty for 45 days was vacated for a new offense of failing to report to his appointed place of duty.

6.  Sixteen counseling statements, dated 28 June 2002 through 24 May 2006, for monthly performance counseling for doing good job, failing to follow instructions, missing formations, failing to physically sign out at the staff duty desk, and separation counseling.

7.  Numerous medical documents showing the applicant was diagnosed with a sleeping disorder or insomnia while on active duty.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

The applicant provided a DD Form 293; a DD Form 214; documents for the Department of Veterans Affairs (PTSD diagnosis), 36 pages; and AMHRR documents (including medical documents), 110 pages.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided with the application.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY  

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 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 being absent 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.   

2.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

3.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.


DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  

2.  After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to honorable for the following reasons:  

	a.  The applicant’s service record shows that he was diagnosed with a sleeping disorder and insomnia after returning from Iraq.

	b.  Length and quality of service:  The applicant served 4 years, 10 months, and 22 days of active duty, thus the preponderance of his service was honorable.

	c.  The applicant provided documents from the Department of Veterans Affairs showing that he was granted a service connected disability for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  The VA notes that the original diagnosis of insomnia was due to the beginning manifestations of PTSD.   

	d. The record confirms the applicant received an ARCOM, an AGCM, and served a tour in combat.

	e.  On 30 June 2006, Dr l, stated in effect, the applicant was taking three different medications, and one of them may cause extreme sleepiness.  He recommended the applicant not receive any adverse or punitive actions.     

3.  This recommendation is made after full consideration of all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service may now be too harsh and as a result inequitable. 

4. The applicant contends that his discharge was unfair because of his medical condition that occurred after serving in Iraq.  The condition (sleep disorder) caused him to be late or miss formations.  The applicant was assigned to the rear detachment when discharged.
 
5.  In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the discharge was `inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.  However, the reason for the discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.


SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review    Date:    7 June 2013		Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers: NA

Board Vote:
Character Change:  2	No Change:  3
Reason Change:	2	No Change:  3
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		No
Change Characterization to:	No Change
Change Reason to:			No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Other:					NA



















Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions


ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20120022314



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1