IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 January 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140016868 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 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 an upgrade of his discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he failed to adapt after serving 12 months in Iraq, and a pattern of misconduct followed. He was diagnosed with severe Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms; his pattern of behavior was in correlation to PTSD symptoms. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 22 September 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 28 July 2007 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14 Paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: Rear Detachment, 1-26th Infantry, 1st Infantry Division, Schweinfurt, GE f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 20 July 2006, 2 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 9 days h. Total Service: 3 years, 11 months, 15 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: RA (030814-060719)/HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 42A10, Human Resources Specialist m. GT Score: 111 n. Education: GED Certificate o. Overseas Service: Germany/Southwest Asia p. Combat Service: Iraq (040422-050214) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, ASR OSR-2, MUC 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 14 August 2003, for a period of 4 years. He was 18 years old at the time of entry with a GED Certificate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 42A10, Human Resources Specialist. He reenlisted on 20 July 2006, for a period of 2 years and was 23 years old. His record also shows he served a combat tour, he earned several awards including an ARCOM, AAM, and an AGCM; and he achieved the rank of SPC/E-4. He was serving in Schweinfurt, GE, when his discharge was initiated. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 9 July 2007, 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 a pattern of misconduct. Specifically for the following offenses: a. failing to report to his designated place of duty on several occasions, b. being AWOL for three days, and c. disrespecting a commissioned officer and noncommissioned officers. 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 9 July 2007, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted 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 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 28 July 2007, 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 record of service indicates three days of time lost for being AWOL from 10 May 2006 until 12 May 2006, mode of return unknown. However, this period is not annotated on the applicant’s DD Form 214 block 29, dates of time lost during this period. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. An Article 15 dated, 23 March 2007, for behaving with disrespect towards a commissioned officer (CPT W, 070305); treating with contempt and being disrespectful in language towards a noncommissioned officer x 2 (SSG, 070305, SGT 070108); and without authority, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 2 (070304 and 070107); the punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3, extra duty, restriction and no alcohol for 14 days (CG). 2. A Military Police Report dated 11 May 2006, indicating the applicant was under investigation for being AWOL. 3. He received five negative counseling statements dated between 12 January 2007 and 20 June 2007, for failing to report several times and initiation of Chapter 14 separation action. 4. The record contains two DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 11 May 2006 and 12 June 2006, showing the applicant’s present for duty and AWOL dates. 5. DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 20 March 2007, indicating the applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder with narcissistic features. He was unable to cope with multiple stressors, including experiences in Iraq, relationship issues, and a poor relationship with his unit due to back problems. Despite treatment by the Schweinfurt Mental Health and counseling and support from his command it was likely he would still continue to have problems. It was recommended the command consider administrative separation under Chapter 5-13, AR 635-200. The applicant was cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate. 6. A DD Form 553 (Deserter/Absentee Wanted by the Armed Forces), dated 11 May 2006, indicating the applicant was wanted as a deserter. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, and a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs, indicating he was being referred to the PTSD Clinical Team at the Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center for weekly evidence-based treatment of symptoms of PTSD. 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 the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records the issues and documents 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 pattern of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by an Article 15, a military police report, five negative counseling statements and two DA Forms 4187. 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 failed to adapt after serving 12 months in Iraq and a pattern of misconduct followed. On 20 March 2007, the record shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation, which indicated he was diagnosed with a personality disorder with narcissistic features. He was unable to cope with multiple stressors, including experiences in Iraq, relationship issues, and a poor relationship with his unit due to back problems. Despite treatment by the Schweinfurt Mental Health and counseling and support from his command it was likely he would still continue to have problems. 5. The applicant further contends he was diagnosed with severe PTSD symptoms; his pattern of behavior was in correlation to the PTSD symptoms. 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. Further, the applicant bears the burden of presenting 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 that PTSD was the cause of his misconduct. 7. Also, the letter from the VA is acknowledged, indicating the applicant was referred to the PTSD clinical team at the VA medical center. 8. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 9. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Personal Appearance Date: 12 January 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify: No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: None DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: 1. The applicant did not submit additional documents. 2. The applicant presented no additional contentions. In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. 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: 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) AR20140016868 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1