IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE: 	        2 June 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090005313 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request for correction of his military records to upgrade his discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was not given a proper mental evaluation after his return from Iraq.  He suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) which was the cause of his misconduct.  PTSD led him to extreme binge drinking and trouble.  He never had any problems prior to his return from Iraq.  He feels that the Army did him wrong.  His unit neglected to seek the help he needed or to look into the root of the problem.  His last month and a half on active duty was nothing more than name calling, public embarrassment, humiliation, and isolation.  His fellow Soldiers were told not to talk to him.  He contends that he was a great Soldier who just needed some help.

3.  The applicant provides, in support of his reconsideration, a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20080007622 on 31 July 2008.

2.  The applicant has made additional argument that is new evidence requiring consideration by the Board.
3.  In the original Board proceedings, the applicant stated that his discharge should be upgraded because he had served in Iraq and that his misconduct was the result of his suffering from PTSD.   The Board determined that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to show that his discharge was in error or unjust.  Therefore, his request was denied.

4.  On 3 August 2004, approximately 6 months after the applicant's return from duty in Iraq, he underwent a mental status evaluation.  This mental evaluation determined that he was mentally responsible and did not identify any conditions that would indicate he was suffering from PTSD.  He was subsequently found medically qualified for separation.

5.  On 14 October 2004, the applicant was discharged, with a general under honorable conditions discharge, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct.

6.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribed procedures for separating personnel for misconduct because of a commission of a serious offense.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.  The separation authority may direct a general discharge if such a discharge is merited by the Soldier's overall record.

7.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, further 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that he suffers from PTSD which was the cause for his misconduct.  He feels that the Army did him wrong.  He contends that he was a great Soldier who just needed some help.

2.  There is no available evidence of record and the applicant has not provided any documentary evidence to substantiate his contention that his misconduct was the direct result of PTSD.  In addition, in August 2004 a mental status evaluation, presumable conducted by competent military medical personnel, determined he was mentally responsible.
3.  In view of the above, the applicant's request for reconsideration should be denied.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X___  ___X____  ____X___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20080007622, dated 31 July 2008.



      _________X_____________
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090005313



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090005313



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1