IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 27 May 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140003373 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action 1. After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the analyst’s Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his two combat tours in Iraq, and the medical circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e., the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD, alcohol dependence in remission and a major depressive disorder), mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record and as a result it is inequitable. 2. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board further determined the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails restoration of grade to SPC/E-4. 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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to fully honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he did not receive proper medical or mental health care after returning from Iraq, to help him cope with his Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and three other problems he was experiencing. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 20 February 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 26 January 2010 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14 paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: Rear Detachment, 1-77th Armored Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, Fort Bliss, TX f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 20 January 2006, NIF g. Current Enlistment Service: 4 years, 7 days h. Total Service: 5 years, 10 months, 25 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: RA (040302-060119)/HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 21B10, Combat Engineer m. GT Score: 95 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia p. Combat Service: Iraq x 2 (050306-060223), (061106-071223) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, CAB r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: No t. Counseling Statements: No u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 March 2004, for a period of 3 years. He was 19 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He trained in and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 21B10, Combat Engineer. He reenlisted on 20 January 2006; the period of service was not in the file. His record also shows he served two combat tours, he did earn several awards including an ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, and a CAB; and he achieved the rank of SPC/E-4. He was serving at Fort Bliss, TX when his discharge was initiated. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 11 December 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense. Specifically for the following offenses: a. injuring two individuals in a vehicular accident; it was later discovered he was driving under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident (080617), and b. being convicted of intoxicated assault with a vehicle (091104). 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an under other than honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights. 3. On 15 December 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service of no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions, and indicated he intended to submit a statement on his own behalf, which was not in the file. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate and senior commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 4. On 6 January 2010, the applicant again consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily and unconditionally waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement on his own behalf. The applicant further understood that as a result he may received an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 5. The separation authority’s documentation directing the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is not contained in the available record and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. 6. However, the DD Form 214 indicates on 26 January 2010, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKQ and a reentry (RE) code of 3. The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 7. The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences, time lost, negative counseling statements or any actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. El Paso County Texas, 171st District Court document, dated 19 August 2009, indicating the applicant was charged with intoxicated assault with a vehicle. 2. DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 4 December 2009, indicating the applicant was diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse disorder in remission, depression and a narcissistic personality disorder. The applicant was screened for PTSD and TBI; there was no condition present at the time that warranted a medical evaluation board. The applicant was cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 149, applicant’s letter to the VA, support statement (two pages), 171st District Court El Paso County, Texas document, and a West Texas, Community Supervision and Correction Department letter. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any information with his 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 his characterization of service was carefully considered. 2. After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the documents and the issue submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit a partial upgrade of the applicant's discharge to general, under honorable conditions for the following reasons: a. Overall length and quality of service: The applicant served 1 year, 10 months, and 18 days of his initial contract of 3 years. He reenlisted and served 4 years and 7 days of that reenlistment, giving him a total of 5 years, 10 months and 25 days of military service, thus the preponderance of his service was honorable. b. The record confirms the applicant received several awards, specifically; an ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, and a CAB; he served two combat tours in Iraq. c. Medical circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e., the applicant was diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse disorder in remission, depression and a narcissistic personality disorder while on active duty). 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 is too harsh and as a result, it is inequitable. 4. In view of the foregoing, the characterization of the applicant’s discharge is inequitable and the analyst recommends the Board grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. However, the reason for the discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. This action entails restoration of grade to SPC/E-4. 5. The applicant contends he did not receive proper medical or mental health care after returning from Iraq, to help him cope with PTSD and three other problems he was experiencing. The service record contains no evidence of PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. 6. The applicant further contends he is trying to better himself by continuing his education and finding steady employment. 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. Further, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention he did not receive proper medical or mental health care. (See paragraph 4 above). BOARD DETERMINATION AND DIRECTED ACTION: 1. After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the analyst’s Discussion and Recommendation, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his two combat tours in Iraq, and the medical circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e., the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD, alcohol dependence in remission and a major depressive disorder), mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record and as a result it is inequitable. 2. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board further determined the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails restoration of grade to SPC/E-4. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 27 May 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify: NA Counsel: No Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 3 No Change: 2 Reason Change: 0 No Change: 0 (Board member names available upon request) Board Action Directed: Issue a new DD Form 214: Yes Change Characterization to: Honorable Change Reason to: No Change Change Authority for Separation: NA Change RE Code to: NA Grade Restoration to: E-4/SPC 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) AR20140003373 Page 2 of 7 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1