IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	23 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006275
___________________________________________________________________________

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 the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.



      
      
      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 discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, his misconduct was a result of an undiagnosed Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  The applicant contends he has received treatment for TBI and PTSD since his separation.  If he had been properly diagnosed with PTSD he knows he would have been able to continue his career as he intended.  The change in his characterization will allow him to take college classes and have continued benefits.  He cannot drive and lives with his mother where he can get the support he needs.  His care has become a large financial hardship on his mother.  He feels he served his country as did his father and grandfather.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			29 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				22 March 2011
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200,
   Chapter 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:				Rear Detachment Company, 1st Battalion, 22nd 
Infantry Regiment, Fort Carson, CO
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		4 January 2007, 6 years, 16 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:		4 years, 2 months 19 days
h. Total Service:				4 years, 2 months, 19 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		11B10, Infantryman
m. GT Score:					101
n. Education:					GED
o. Overseas Service:				SWA
p. Combat Service:				Iraq (20080314-20090313)
q. Decorations/Awards:			ARCOM, AAM, VAU, NDSM, GWOTSM, 
   ICM-CS, ASR, OSR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		No
s. Performance Ratings:			None
t. Counseling Statements:			Yes
u. Prior Board Review:				None


SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 January 2007, for a period of 6 years and 16 weeks.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and had a GED.  He served in Iraq and earned an ARCOM, AAM, VAU and the ICM CS.  He completed 4 years, 2 months, and 19 days of active duty service for the period under review.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 2 December 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, 14-12b. Specifically for:

	a.  Receiving two Article 15’s for possessing drug paraphernalia and smoking Black Mamba; and the other for being drunk on duty. 

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

3.  On 2 March 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and did not submit 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 March 2011, the separation authority directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  The applicant was separated on 22 March 2004, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b,patterns of misconduct with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKA, and an RE code of 3.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Article 15, dated 17 January 2008, for failing to maintain accountability of his military identification card on 10 July 2007.  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-2, forfeiture of $340 (both suspended), 14 days of extra duty and restriction (CG). The DA Form 2627 continuation sheet is not in the file. 

2.  Article 15, dated 29 January 2010, the applicant was found drunk on duty on 11 January 2010.  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-3, forfeiture of $433 (suspended), 14 days of extra duty and restriction (CG) 

3.  Article 15, dated 24 May 2010, for wrongfully possessing drug paraphernalia on 19 March 2010; and, for wrongfully smoking Black Mamba incense for the purpose of inducing excitement, intoxication, or stupefaction of the central nervous system on or about 19 February and 19 March 2010.  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $723 pay per month for two months (suspended), 30 days extra duty and restriction.  Both acts were a violation of a lawful general regulation (FG).

4.  Five  negative counseling statements dated between 10 July 2007 and 20 July 2010, for disobeying orders, drunk on duty, losing his ID card (3 times) and notification of intent to chapter. 

5.  Behavioral Health documents including a Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation dated    30 September 2012 what states "Based on clinical interview and review of records, SM has Adjustment Disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct and alcohol dependence.  An expeditious discharge from active duty is recommended.  Specifically, this service member does not have Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder nor does he have any TBI;" and, a 25 January 2010 DA Form 8003, Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment which cites diagnoses of both alcohol dependence and hallucinogen abuse.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 27 March 2013, a letter from his speech/Language Pathologist to VA, dated 11 May 2012, four Certificates of Completion, two VA letters for completion of substance training.  

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant states he has been treated for TBI, PTSD, depression and anxiety related to his service in the Army.  

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.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The record confirms 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.  It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  By the pattern of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by 3 Articles 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

3.  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.  

4.  The applicant contends his misconduct was a result of an undiagnosed PTSD and the Veterans Administration has been treating him for PTSD.  However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  The record shows that on 30 September 2010, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong.  The doctor’s remarks, in part, reflect “this service member does not have Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder nor does he have any TBI.  SM is psychiatrically cleared for administrative separation.”  

5.  The applicant contends the change in his characterization will allow him to take college classes and have continued benefits.  Eligibility for veteran's benefits (i.e., medical and educational benefits) under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should continue to contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.

6.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

7.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief.  

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review      Date:  23 October 2013          Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel:  None

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 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)		AR20130006275



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1