IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	12 April 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130001430
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service to include his combat service and post-service accomplishments and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  





      
      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 characterization from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he graduated from AIT with honors, became an Army Ranger and completed five combat tours.  After his return from Iraq, one evening he went out with some friends and had too much to drink.  He was involved in a fight, was arrested and charged with felony assault and felony hate crime.  He was found not guilty of those charges and instead was convicted of misdemeanor assault and attempted malicious harassment which was also a misdemeanor.  He has been diagnosed with PTSD and is currently receiving help from the Veterans Administration.  After leaving the Army he struggled and could not hold a job but he is now working as a Wounded Warrior Program Coordinator and has learned a tremendous amount of information about PTSD.  He acknowledges that his actions were inexcusable but believes his untreated and undiagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder had something to do with his behavior that night.  He feels the Army should have waited until after his civilian charges were resolved before discharging him.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		9 January 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			20 March 2007
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, 14-12c, 						JKQ, RE-3        
e. Unit of assignment:			C Co, 2d Bn, 75th Ranger Regiment, Fort Lewis, WA
f. Enlistment Date/Term:		21 January 2003, 3 years, extended for the 							convenience of the government
g. Current Enlistment Service:	4 years, 2 months, 0 days
h. Total Service:			4 years, 2 months, 0 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None 
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-5	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	11B2V, Infantry
m. GT Score:				118
n. Education:				GED
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			Iraq, 2 tours (060103-060412, 061003-070111)
					Afghanistan, 3 tours (031107-031209, 040315-							040525, 050405-050716)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM-3, NDSM, ACM, ICM-2, GWOTEM, GWTSM, 					ASR, OSR, CIB
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		Yes
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes	
u. Prior Board Review:			No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 January 2003 for a period of 3 years and was extended for the convenience of the government.  He was 17 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED).  He was trained as an Infantryman and later became an Army Ranger.  His record shows he achieved the rank of Sergeant, served five combat tours and received 3 ARCOMs.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates a period of continuous honorable active service between 21 January 2003 and 10 July 2006 which would indicate he had reenlisted; however, the record does not contain any reenlistment documents.  He served a total of 4 years and 2 months in active duty service.   

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The service record shows that on 12 March 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct-commission of a serious offense, based on civilian charges of second degree felony assault and malicious harassment.  
      
2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.  

3.  On 12 March 2007, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested an administrative separation board (was not entitled to such a board), and submitted 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 action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 12 March 2007, 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 on 20 March 2007, for misconduct (serious offense), under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, with an SPD code of JKQ and a RE code of 3.

6.  The service record contains no evidence of lost time.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  The record does not show any actions under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

2.  One negative counseling dated 1 February 2007, in which he was informed of the charges pending against him in civilian court.    

3.  A CID Report dated 7 February 2007, in which the applicant is the subject of an investigation for second degree assault and malicious harassment.  

4.  A civilian police arrest report dated 26 January 2007.

5.  An NCOER for the period of November 2005 through June 2010, where the applicant was rated as among the best, 1/1, successful/superior.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

A DD Form 149, a self-authored statement, court documents, Wounded Warrior Project letter, and a character reference letter.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant is working as the Wounded Warrior Outreach Program Coordinator for the Pacific Northwest.  

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 fully honorable for the following reasons:  

	a. Length and quality of service:  The applicant served 4 years and 2 moths of a 4-year enlistment, thus the preponderance of his service was honorable.

	b. The record confirms the applicant received several awards, specifically 3 ARCOMs and a CIB.  

	c. The applicant achieved the rank of Sergeant and received an NCOER for a 12-month period in which the rater considered him as being among the best and the senior rated as successful and among the best and rated him as 1/1 respectively.

	d. The applicant’s post-service accomplishments as provided in one of the documents with his application indicates he became the Wounded Warrior Program Outreach Coordinator for the Pacific Northwest and is now serving in that capacity.

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 was involved in a fight after a night in which he had gone out with some friends and had too much to drink.  He was initially charged with felony offenses that were later downgraded to misdemeanor offenses as shown by the documents in his service record and the court document provided with the application.

5.  In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the discharge is now inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant 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: 12 April 2013    Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: Yes [ Redacted ]

Witnesses/Observers: NA

Board Vote:
Character  	Change:  0	No Change:  5
Reason	Change:  0	No Change:  5
(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 RE Code to:	N/A
Grade Restoration to:	N/A
Change Authority for Separation:	N/A
Other:		N/A

















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	UOTH - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR 20130001430

6



ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1