IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	2 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130007229
___________________________________________________________________________

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.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he served over four years without any prior incidents.  The applicant contends after his return from a second deployment, he was diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and anger management issues.  He states he had a confrontation with his acting First Sergeant (1SG) that led to his anger getting past a point of control.  He contends he walked away from the confrontation as instructed by his mental health provider and for this reason he was given an Article 15 and extra duty.  The applicant states he was denied leave which resulted in him becoming quite disgruntled with the chain of command.  He states he was counted for failure to report (FTR) on multiple occasions and discharged for this reason.  He contends he was originally justified in his actions and since he was eight months from completion of his contract, the repercussions were extreme and caused hardship on him and his family.  The applicant contends the discharge remains a black mark on an otherwise stellar record of service and prohibits him from using his GI Bill benefits to attend college full-time to complete his degree and provide for his family.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			12 April 2013
b. Discharge Received:			Under Honorable Conditions, (General)
c. Date of Discharge:				20 March 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Pattern of Misconduct/AR 635-200, Chapter
14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:				G Co, 3rd BSB, 1st HBCT, 3rd ID, Fort Stewart,
GA 
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		9 August 2007; 6 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:		4 years, 7 months, 12 days
h. Total Service:				5 years, 4 months, 26 days
i. Time Lost:					15 days 
j. Previous Discharges:			USAR 061025-061108/NA, ADT 061109-
070712/HD, USAR 070713-070808/NA
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		94E10, Radio & Communications Security 
Repairer
m. GT Score:					114
n. Education:					HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				SWA, Germany
p. Combat Service:				Iraq x 2 (080409-090528 and 100708-101203)
q. Decorations/Awards:			AAM-2, NDSM, ICM-CS, GWTSM, ASR,
OSR, CAB, MUC,
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 9 August 2007 for a period of 6 years.  He was 23 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  His record shows he served two deployments in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, earned two AAM’s, and achieved the rank of SPC/E-4.  He completed 5 years, 4 months, and 26 days of active duty service.  At the time his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Stewart, GA.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 9 February 2012, the commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b. Specifically for:

	a.  Failure to go at the prescribed time to his place of duty on numerous occasions 
                during 2011.

	b.  Being absent without leave (AWOL) on more than one occasion.

	c.  Being disrespectful and disobeying orders given by non-commissioned officers.

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

3.  On 13 February 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action 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 action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 6 March 2012, 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 separated on 20 March 2012, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKA, and an RE code of 3.

6.  The applicant's record shows he was absent without leave (AWOL) for 15 days during the period of 29 September 2011 through 13 October 2011.  Mode of return is unknown.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) does not capture the dates of time lost during this period of service.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1  The applicant’s record shows the following:

     a.  Article 15, dated 1 July 2011, for disrespect to a non-commissioned officer and disobeying a lawful order from an NCO (110610).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-3, forfeiture of $455 pay (suspended), 14 days of extra duty and restriction (CG) 

     b.  Article 15, dated 9 November 2011, for failure to be at appointed place of duty at the prescribed time (110912 and 110913) and for being absent without leave (110929-111013).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-2; reduction to the grade of E-1 (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and 45 days of a suspended restriction (FG).

2.  The suspended sentence described in the above paragraph (1b), was vacated on 14 December 2011, for new offenses of failing to report.

3.  Five negative counseling statements dated between 10 June 2011 and 21 November 2011, for insubordinate conduct toward a senior NCO, failure to report (FTR), failure to obey an order, disorderly conduct, and for being AWOL.
      
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a hand-written statement as his signature page for the on-line application submitted, a DD Form 214, a copy of reassignment orders to Fort Stewart Transition Center. 

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any 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.  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 of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by two Article 15s and several negative counseling statements 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 discharge was inequitable because he served over four years without any prior incidents.  However, the service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses as depicted in the numerous negative counselings, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army and were prejudicial to good order and discipline.

5.  The applicant further contends he was diagnosed with PTSD and anger management issues after returning from his second deployment.  The applicant’s record shows he was being treated for a considerable history of anger management problems.  In addition, the applicant had a positive screen for PTSD however, it was determined that this condition did not meet criteria in AR 40-501 for a medical evaluation board.  The evaluation further determined the applicant knew the difference between right and wrong as was concurrently cleared for any administrative actions.  

6.  The applicant’s desire for 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 contact a local office of the Department of Veteran Affairs for further assistance.

7.  Finally, the applicant contends his actions were justified and the repercussions were extreme causing a hardship for his family.  Although the applicant addressed this concern to the chain of command in his appeal of the non-judicial punishment, this rationale as a basis for what he believes was unfair is not supported by the evidence contained in the record and can only be viewed as speculative in nature.

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

9.  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:  2 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)		AR20130007229

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1