Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2011/09/16 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant's states: "I was an excellent Soldier up until I started having marital problems and my wife had to get phsychological care. As a result, I was stressed to the breaking point. My command did not even try to support or help my situation. As a result, my appearance and behaviors changed. I was losing sleep and was stresed so badly I started getting into trouble. My troubles eventually led to my early discharge with a GUHC discharge. If my command had treated me more as a "troubled" Soldier and less as a "Problem" Soldier I would not have gotten to GUHC. Plese take this into account when reviewing my claim." II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 100720 Discharge Received: Date: 100827 Chapter: 14-12b AR: 635-200 Reason: Pattern of Misconduct RE: SPD: JKA Unit/Location: 172d Chem Co, 84th EOD, Fort Riley, KS Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 100604, Wrongfully committed indecent sexual acts on two other individuals between (100101 and 100228), committed sodomy on another female between (100101 and 100228), and wrongfully purchasing alcohol for a minor between (100101 and 100228), reduction to E1; forfeiture of $723.00 per month for two months; extra duty for 45 days; and restriction for 45 days, (FG). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 20 Current ENL Date: 090211 Current ENL Term: 06 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 06 Mos, 17 Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 07 Mos, 03 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-070125-090210/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 74D10/Chemical Operations Specialist GT: 123 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Korea Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 20 July 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconduct for having continually failed to report to his unit on time, failing to maintain the standards of the unit which reduced the morale within the unit, having been counseled numerous times for deficiencies and failing to improve his behavior, and for being a constant distraction to the chain of command and fellow Soldiers, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 27 July 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in his behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 3 August 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. b. Legal Basis for Separation: 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 absence 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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review, the documents, and the issues he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 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. By his misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. 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. Furthermore, the analyst concluded that the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Having examined all the circumstances, the analyst determined that the applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant’s service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant's contends that stress at work and family issues at home resulted in his discharge. While the applicant may believe his stress at home and work was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief from stress 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. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the characterization of service and reason for discharge to include the reentry eligibility code were both proper and equitable, and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 23 March 2012 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, State of Illinois Department of Veterans' Affairs Claim Form, DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. IX. Board Decision Board Vote: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) X. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI. Certification Signature Approval Authority: EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board BONITA E. TROTMAN Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army Secretary Recorder Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20110019009 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 4 pages