IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	1 May 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120022990
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

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 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 under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable conditions or honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and his problems were a result of PTSD.  He has trouble keeping a job that pays enough to make a living.  He can’t receive VA benefits because of the discharge he received.   

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		12 December 2012
b. Discharge Received:		 Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			22 July 2010
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (AWOL), AR 635-200, paragraph
      14-12c(1), JKD, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			B Co, 526th  Brigade Support Bn, Fort Campbell, KY
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	23 October 2007, NIF, the immediate reenlist contract 					is not contained in the available records. 
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 7 months, 3 days
h. Total Service:			10 years, 9 months, 9 days
i. Time Lost:				59 days
j. Previous Discharges:		ARNG-(990816-000605)/NA									IADT-(000606-001101)/UNC									ARNG-(001102-010101)/NA									ADT-(010102-010702)/HD										ARNG-(010703-020129)/HD
      RA-(020129-040625)/HD						RA-(040626-071022)/HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	91B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic
m. GT Score:				86
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			Iraq x 2 (050928-060919), (071017-081117)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AGCM-2, NDSM, AFEM, ICM-W/3 CS 						GWOTSM, AFRM-W/”M” DEV, ASR, OSR-2
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 Army National Guard on 16 August 1999 for 8 years, he was 18 years old at the time and in high school.  He was ordered to active duty for his initial training and subsequently to active duty.  He was discharged from the National Guard on 29 January 2002 with an honorable discharge.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 January 2002, for a period of 3 years.  He was 21 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  On 26 June 2004, he reenlisted for a period of 6 years and was 23 years old at the time.  On his last reenlistment of 23 October 2007, the period he reenlisted for is not contained in the available record; he was 26 years old at the time. He was serving at Fort Campbell, KY, when his discharge was initiated.  His record also shows that he served two combat tours and earned several awards including an ARCOM, AGCM-2 and an AFRM-W/”M” DEV. 

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 25 June 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(1), AR 635-200, specifically for absenting himself from his unit (AWOL) (100326-100524) 

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an under other than under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.

3.  On 30 June 2010, the applicant waived legal counsel and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, was advised of 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 and senior commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 19 July 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of under other than honorable conditions.

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 22 July 2010, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions, under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(1), AR 635-200, for misconduct (AWOL), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKD and an RE code of 3.

6.  The applicant's record shows he was AWOL for 59 days during the period 26 March 2010 through 23 May 2010.  The applicant was apprehended by civil authorities.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1. A Company Grade Article 15, dated 1 January 2008, for without authority, failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 3 (071217, 071220, 071221); the punishment consisted of reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $403 pay x 1 month (suspended), and extra duty for 14 days.   

2.  Three negative counseling statements dated between 16 March 2010 through 3 June 2010 for failing to report, willfully disobeying an officer on divers occasions and being notified of Chapter 14 separation proceedings.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 149, dated 6 December 2012; a Letter, National Personnel Record Center, dated 21 November 2012, with Army Military Human Resource Record, one hundred forty-eight (148) pages. The applicant annotated on his DD Form 149, that in support of his application he attached medical records and a statement; however, these documents were not attached with the application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any. 

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 her 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 misconduct (AWOL), the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a general or an honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by an Article 15 for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. 

3.  The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade.  However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge.

4.  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.

5.  The applicant contends he was diagnosed with PTSD and his problems were a result of PTSD.  However, 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 the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his contention.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that PTSD was the result of his problems.          

7.  The applicant further contends he has trouble keeping a job that pays enough to make a living.  However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

8.  The applicant also contends he can’t receive VA benefits because of the discharge he received.  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.
  
9.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

10.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review	   Date: 1 May 2013        Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

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)		AR20120022990



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1