IN THE CASE OF:  
      
      BOARD DATE:  	8 June 2015

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20150000578
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony, and notwithstanding the analyst’s 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 characterization to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, his discharge does not accurately reflect his serve of more than four years; which includes a combat tour and an ARCOM for exemplary service.  His two Article 15s were unjust; his incidents of misconduct do not represent a true pattern of misconduct and his discharge might represent a disparate treatment in light of the relatively minor infractions.  He was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) by the VA after his discharge and granted a 70 percent disabling rating.  His two minor infractions were a result of the manifestation of PTSD symptoms.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		5 January 2015
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			26 September 2006
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14						paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			D Co, 2-82nd Combat Aviation Brigade, Fort Bragg 						NC
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	23 July 2002, 6 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	4 years, 2 months, 4 days
h. Total Service:			4 years, 2 months, 4 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	15T1P, UH-60 Helicopter Repairer
m. GT Score:				111
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (030906-040406)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		No
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			Yes
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 July 2002, for a period of 6 years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He trained in and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 15T1P, UH-60 Helicopter Repairer.  His record also shows he served a combat tour, earned an ARCOM; and he achieved the rank of SPC/E-4.  He was serving at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, when his discharge was initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 16 August 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12a, AR 635-200, by reason of a pattern of minor disciplinary infractions.  Specifically, for the following offenses:

     a.  receiving a Summarized Article 15 (060224), for failing to report to his appointed place of duty and lying to a NCO, and

     b.  receiving a FG Article (060608), for violating a lawful general statute.

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 17 August 2006, 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.  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 from the Army on 26 September 2006, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for a pattern of misconduct, with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and a RE code of 3. 

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  A FG Article 15 dated, 8 June 2006, for violating a lawful general statute, by wrongfully speeding to elude arrest (060415); the punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3, extra duty and restriction for 45 days.

2.  A Summarized Article 15 dated 24 February 2006, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (060117); and with intent to deceive, made a false official statement to a NCO (060117); the punishment consisted of extra duty and restriction for 14 days (both suspended).
3.  He received two negative counseling statements dated 18 January 2006 and 26 April 2006, for failing to report, lying to a NCO and improper operation of a motor vehicle.

4.  DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 10 July 2006, indicating the applicant had no evidence of an emotional or mental disorder of psychiatric significance or of sufficient severity to warrant disposition through medical channels.  He was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), personal appearance notification response form, self-authored statement, three support statements, and a VA rating decision document (seven pages), high achievement certificate, Daytona State College, and an unofficial college transcript (three pages).

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant provided a document which shows he is employed as a human resources manager at Halifax Health in Daytona.

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 his characterization of service was carefully considered.

2.  After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the issues and documents submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to honorable for the following reasons:

     a.  Length and quality of applicant’s service to include his combat tour:  He served 4 years,                   2 months and 4 days of his enlistment contract of 6 years; thus the preponderance of his service was honorable.  The record confirms the applicant received an ARCOM; and served a tour of combat in Iraq.

     b.  Medical circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e., the record shows the applicant was diagnosed by the VA with service connected PTSD, a depressive disorder and alcohol dependence and was receiving treatment for these conditions).

3.  This recommendation was 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 was too harsh and as a result, it is inequitable. 

4.  In view of the foregoing, the characterization of the discharge is inequitable and the analyst recommends the Board grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.

5.  Therefore, the reason for discharge being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief.  See paragraph 4 above.

BOARD DETERMINATION AND DIRECTED ACTION:

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony, and notwithstanding the analyst’s Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.



SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Personal Appearance     Date:  8 June 2015     Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify:  Yes

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  None

DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE:

The applicant submitted the following additional documents or additional contentions.

Board Vote:
Character Change:   2	No Change:  3
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:  	No Change	
Change RE Code to:  			No Change
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)		AR20150000578



Page 2 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1