IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	16 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130012316
___________________________________________________________________________

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 that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable or general, under honorable conditions.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he served this great country for sixteen years and went on six deployments (received a CAB).  He has been diagnosed with PTSD, lost his hearing (requires a hearing aid), and have a host of other injuries he is currently dealing with.  He is not writing this letter for sympathy, and to explain why he is asking for an upgrade of his discharge.  When he came back from his last deployment, he was messed up mentally, physically, and emotionally.  He did not know at that time what was wrong.  He couldn’t sleep and was having nightmares all the time.  He started drinking and he found peace when he drank because that was the only way he could sleep.  The drinking caused him to make a bad decision to drink and drive, which resulted in him receiving a DUI and discharged.  He received the help he needed at Greenleaf Treatment Center (30 day in-patience rehabilitation).  He is asking for his 16 years of honorable service to be considered.  He can’t find a good job because of the characterization of his discharge, can’t go to school, and his VA claim is in jeopardy. 

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			5 July 2013	
b. Discharge Received:			Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				12 January 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Misconduct (Serious Offense),              								AR 635-200, 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3	
e. Unit of assignment:				Alpha Company, 3rd Brigade Support 								Battalion, 1st Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 							Fort Stewart, GA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		21 November 2007, 6 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:		4 years, 1 month, 22 days
h. Total Service:				16 years, 5 months, 23 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			USAR (950422-950719), NA									RA (950720-990719), HD										Break in Service											RA (010207-030330), HD										RA (030331-050829), HD										RA (050830-071120), HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-6
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		88M10, Motor Transport Operator
m. GT Score:					94
n. Education:					GED																				


														
o. Overseas Service:				Germany, SWA x 4	
p. Combat Service:				Afghanistan (011123-020523)									Kuwait (030223-040228)										Iraq (050101-060101 and 070115-080401)
q. Decorations/Awards:			ARCOM-4, AAM, AGCM-3, NDSM-2, AFEM, 							ACM-w/CS-2, ICM-w/CS, GWOTEM, 								GWOTSM, AFSM, NPDR-2, ASR, OSR, 							ARCOSR, NATO MDL, CAB, ASUA
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 22 April 1995, for a period of four years.  He received an honorable discharge upon the completion of his enlistment.  The applicant had a break in service until 7 February 2001, and he enlisted for a period of 3 years.  The applicant has reenlisted three times since rejoining the Army.  When his discharge proceeding were initiated he was serving at Fort Stewart, GA.  He had served four combat tours and over 
16 years of active service at the time of his discharge.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 13 June 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of misconduct (serious offense), for the following offenses:

	a.  committing larceny (090525).
	b.  being apprehended for driving drunk (090903).
	c.  disobeying a lawful order from a senior non-commissioned officer (090914).
	
2.  Based on the above misconduct, the commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 15 June 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, 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 commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  The administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel.  The board recommended the applicant be discharge from the service with an under other than honorable discharge.

5.  On 20 December 2011, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other honorable conditions.

6.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 12 January 2012, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and an RE code of 3. 

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Special court-martial adjudged while at Fort Stewart, GA, on 9 November 2010, and the applicant was found guilty of the following:

	Charge IV:  Violation of the UCMJ, Article 111

	     Specification:  In that Sergeant M, U.S. Army, at or near Fort Stewart, Georgia, on or about 3 September 2009, was in actual physical control of a vehicle, to wit: a passenger car, while the alcohol concentration on his breath was as shown by chemical analysis equal to or exceeded 0.08 grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath, which is the limit under the Georgia Code 40-6-391(a)(l) and 40-6-391(a)(5).

	Additional Charge I:  Violation of the UCMJ, Article 112

	     Specification:  In that Sergeant M, U.S. Army, having received a lawful order from
Sergeant Major (E-9) B, a noncommissioned Officer, then known by accused to be a
noncommissioned officer, to stop, an order which it was his duty to obey, did at or near Fort Stewart Police Station, Fort Stewart, Georgia, on or about 14 September 2009, willfully disobey the same.  The punishment imposed consisted of a reprimand; reduction to the grade of E-3; and confinement for 45 days.

2.  A Field Grade Article 15, dated 6 August 2009, for stealing a Lovono Think Pad Laptop (090525), the value about $600.00, the property of Mr. W.  The punishment imposed consisted of a reduction to E-5, forfeiture of $1,414.00 pay per month for two months, suspended, and
45 days extra duty.   

3.  The suspension of punishment (090806) for $1,414.00 pay per month for two months, was vacated on 29 October 2009, based on the offense of failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time (090903).

4.  Numerous counseling statements covering the period 13 July 2009 through 21 January 2011, for failing to report, simple assault, admission to the Green Leaf Rehabilitation Program, dereliction of duty, disobeying an order from a senior noncommissioned officer, larceny of government property, and leaving his appointed place of duty.   

5.  Military Police Reports in reference to the following offenses:

	a.  On 21 November 2004, at Ft. Stewart, GA, driving while license suspended and 		     speeding 73/55 MPH.  
	b.  On19 August 2006, for failure to obey a lawful order or regulation (driving on post 		     suspension) and failure to stop at a posted stop sign.
	c.  On 10 May 2008, for failure to obey a lawful order or regulation (driving on post 		     revocation) and driving while license suspended.
	d.  On 3 September 2009, for DUI and failing to obey a lawful order from  COL M, not to 		     drive (090903) on Ft. Stewart, GA.
	e.  On 25 May 2009, larceny of private property.
	f.   On 23 September 2009, drunk and disorderly refused to obey an order from a 		     	     CSM, and resisting apprehension.   
	g.  On 21 November 2009, speeding and driving with suspended license.
	h.  On 8 September 2010, assault consummated by battery.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: 

The applicant provided a DD Form 293; a self-authored statement; a certificate of completion from Greenleaf Rehab Center; AMHRR documents, 20 pages; medical documents, 26 pages; and a DD Form 214.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were provided by the applicant.

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 misconduct (serious offense), the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a general or a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by him committing larceny, being apprehended for driving drunk, and disobeying a lawful order from a senior non-commissioned officer.

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 he is asking that his 16 years of honorable service to be considered.  The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the repeated incidents of misconduct or by the multiple negative counseling statements and the documented actions under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

5.  The applicant provided medical documents and his service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service 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 2 December 2009, 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.  It appears the applicant’s chain of command determined that although he was suffering from PTSD, he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation.  Further, there are many Soldiers with the same condition that completed their service successfully.
6.  The applicant contends he can’t find a good job because of the characterization of his discharge, can’t go to school, and his VA claim is in jeopardy.  However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include 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 Veterans Affairs for further assistance.

7.  The applicant contends after he returned from his last deployment, he was messed up mentally, physically, and emotionally.  He couldn’t sleep and was having nightmares all the time, so he started drinking to find peace.  The applicant shows he was admitted to the Greenleaf Rehab Center; however, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he continued to seek relief from alcohol or other illness through his command or other Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and medical resources available to all Soldiers.  Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct.  

8.  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:  16 October 2013      Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None

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)		AR20130012316

Page 8 of 8 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1