IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 November 2013 CASE NUMBER: AR20130006788 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action 1. After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge to be both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. 2. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26 and 28, contain erroneous entries. 3. The Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant’s DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, b. block 26, separation code changed to JKN, c. block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Minor Infractions). 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 to upgrade his characterization of service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he is requesting an honorable discharge due to the fact he was being seen at a local hospital for his mental health, which was the cause of the discharge. DA form 3822, MAR 2011, states he should have received a Chapter 5-17, AR 635-200, for his condition. He was informed of what he would be receiving, but due to the immediate process of his discharge without any time frame, he was given a general, under honorable conditions discharge. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 5 April 2013 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 22 March 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Civil Conviction), AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Section II, JKB, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: HHC, 4th Bn, 9th IN RGT (Rear) (Provisional), 4th Stryker BCT (R) (P), Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 17 January 2012, 3 years, 16 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 1 month, 6 days h. Total Service: 1 year, 1 month, 6 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B10, Infantryman m. GT Score: 106 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 January 2012, for a period of 3 years and 16 weeks. He was 19 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B10, Infantryman. His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement. He completed 1 year, 1 month, and 6 days of active duty service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 25 February 2013, 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 misconduct for minor disciplinary infractions. Specifically for the following offenses: a. being AWOL (120828) b. failing to report for duty (120827) 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 25 February 2013, the applicant waived consulting with legal counsel, indicated he understood 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. On 6 March 2013, 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 22 March 2013, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, Section II, AR 635-200, for misconduct (civil conviction), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKB and an 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. Article 15, dated 4 October 2012, failing to report (120828). The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-2, forfeiture of $389 per month for one month (suspended), 14 days of extra duty, (CG). 2. Two negative counseling statements, dated 29 August 2012 and 19 December 2012, for self-referring to behavioral health clinic and recommendation for separation; and failing to report for duty. 3. DA Form 3822, Mental Status Evaluation, dated 14 February 2013, indicates the applicant was evaluated and cleared for administrative separation under AR 635-200, Chapter 14. The evaluation further indicates the applicant was diagnosed with having “adjustment D/O w/mixed disturbance, emotions & conduct” for less than 6 months; depression; and according to the treating providers, alcohol dependence and anti-social traits. The behavioral health provider further commented that from a behavioral health provider perspective, the applicant met the medical fitness standards for retention per AT 40-501, paragraph 3-31 to 3-37, as there is no indication of a boardable behavioral health disorder at this time. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided DA Form 3822, Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 18 December 2012; and inpatient treatment medical record, dated 15 January 2013. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant provided none. 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. 4. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKN" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (minor infractions). 5. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKN" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. A careful review of the applicant’s request and his military records revealed an administrative error in his DD Form 214, which reflects that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, separation authority as AR 635-200, chapter 14, section II, block 26 separation code as "JKB," and block 28, narrative reason for separation as “Misconduct (Civil Convictions).” 2. Aside from the aforementioned administrative errors, 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, and the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 3. 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 incidents of misconduct considered as minor infractions, 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 for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and a negative counseling. 4. The applicant provided insufficient corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. 5. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed because his mental status evaluation states he should have received a Chapter 5-17, AR 635-200 discharge. However, the separation authority approved the applicant for separation under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12a, AR 635-200 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Minor Infractions)," and the separation code is "JKN." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. 6. The applicant contends he should have been medically discharged. However, DA Form 3822, Mental Status Evaluation, dated 14 February 2013, indicates the applicant was evaluated and cleared for administrative separation under AR 635-200, Chapter 14. Although the evaluation indicates the applicant was having mental health issues, they do not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. The behavioral health provider, who examined the applicant provided to his command that from a behavioral health provider perspective, the applicant met the medical fitness standards for retention per AR 40-501, paragraph 3-31 to 3-37, “as there is no indication of a boardable behavioral health disorder at this time.” 7. The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. Accordingly, the records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 8. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both, proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. However, recommend the Board make the following changes: a. change block 25, separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a b. change block 26, separation code to JKN c. change block 28, narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 15 November 2013 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? No Counsel: Yes 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: Yes Change Characterization to: No Change Change Reason to: Change to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) Change Authority for Separation: Change to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b Change RE Code to: No Change Grade Restoration to: NA Other: Change SPD Code to JKN 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) AR20130006788 Page 7 of 7 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1