IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	13 November 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130008269
___________________________________________________________________________

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 characterization from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that there were multiple issues between him and his ex-wife which was the basis for most of his Article 15 punishments.  However, he states that there were absolutely no domestic violence issues and he was charged with simple assault.  All of his anger issues were related to PTSD which his wife never really knew how to handle or how to help him address this diagnosis.    

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		29 April 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions 
c. Date of Discharge:			6 July 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, 						JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			C Co, 67th Exp Sig Bn, 35th Sig Bde, Fort Gordon, GA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	Reenlisted, 4 years/see DA Form 5689 and 
DD Form 256A, dated 15 October 2009. 
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 8 months, 21 days 
h. Total Service:			4 years, 9 months, 17 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA 070920-091015/HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	25L10, Cable System Installer/Maintainer 
m. GT Score:				85
n. Education:				HS graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Korea, Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (090820-100716)
q. Decorations/Awards:		AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, 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's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 September 2007, for a period of 4 years.  He reenlisted on 16 October 2009, for 4 years.  He was 21 years old at the time and a high school graduate.  The applicant’s record shows he was awarded the AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, and an OSR.  He served one combat tour in Iraq, and when his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Gordon, GA.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 19 March 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to process him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of pattern of misconduct; specifically for:

	a.  Field Grade Article 15 for assault (14 December 2011).
	b.  Company Grade Article 15 for assault (9 February 2012).
	c.  Failure to be at appointed place of duty (1 February 2012).
	d.  Failure to be at appointed place of duty (2 March 2012).

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and informed the applicant of his rights.

3.  On 20 March 2012, the applicant consulted with military legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 11 April 2012, the separation authority, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  On 15 June 2012, the General Court-Martial Convening Authority (GCMCA) reviewed the separation packet and the medical condition outlined in the Medical Evaluation Board Report and determined the medical condition was not a direct or substantial contributing cause of the misconduct which led to the recommendation for an administrative elimination and directed that the applicant be processed under the administrative separation provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b.

6.  The applicant was separated on 6 July 2012, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b for a Pattern of Misconduct, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKA and an RE code of 3.

7.  The applicant’s record does not show any time lost.



EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  The applicant's disciplinary record includes his acceptance of non-judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), as follows:

	a.  Article 15, dated 14 December 2011, assault on his spouse (111117).  The punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $822.00 for two months (suspended until 120611), extra duty for 45 days (FG).

	b.  Article 15, dated 9 February 2012, assault on his spouse (111224).  The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $347.00 pay (suspended until 7 August 2012), extra duty for 14 days (CG).

2.  Five negative counseling statements dated between 6 December 2011 and 6 March 2012, for failure to repair, simple assault, and discharge counseling.

3.  Two MP Reports dated 18 November 2011 and 24 December 2011, where the applicant was the subject of two separate investigations of simple assault against his spouse. 

4.  The record shows that on 6 March 2012, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates that he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong.  The applicant was screened for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and these conditions were not present and did not meet Army Regulation 40-501 criteria for a medical evaluation board.   

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: 

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 15 April 2013; a DD Form 214; and copies of his civilian mental health records.

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.  However, after examining his military records, the issues and documents submitted with the application, there are insufficient 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 repeated incidents of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s service was marred by two Articles 15; for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and several negative counseling statements. 

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 that he was having marriage issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged, but there were absolutely no domestic violence issues.  He further stated that his spouse never understood how to handle his PTSD issues. While the applicant may believe his marriage issues at home was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief from his issues through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers.  Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct.  

5.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the PTSD diagnosis as outlined in the Vista Electronic Medical Documentation he submitted.  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 6 March 2012, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates that he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong.  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.  There are many Soldiers with the same condition that complete their service successfully. 

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:  13 November 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)		AR20130008269

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1