IN THE CASE OF:	 

      BOARD DATE:  	4 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006308
___________________________________________________________________________

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 to upgrade his characterization of service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was detailed to another unit and had problems adjusting.  He then decided to leave Fort Bragg.  Upon returning from an attempted suicide, he received an Article for the AWOL offense.  He does not believe he should have received an Article 15 because he was having mental issues and not being in the right state of mind.  If he did not receive the Article 15, he would not have been discharged.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	26 March 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	7 April 2011
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-
			12b, JKA, RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	528th Medical Detachment, 261st Multifunctional 
			Medical Battalion (RP), Fort Bragg, NC
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	13 August 2008, 4 years
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 7 months, 21 days
	h.	Total Service:	2 years, 7 months, 21 days
	i.	Time Lost:	4 days
	j.	Previous Discharges:	None
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-3
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	68X10, Mental Health Specialist
	m.	GT Score:	127
	n.	Education:	NIF
	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 13 August 2008, for a period of 4 years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and there is no record indicating whether he is a high school graduate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 68X10, Mental Health Specialist.  His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  He completed 2 years, 7 months, and 21 days of active duty service.


SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 10 March 2011, 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 pattern of misconduct, specifically for having repeated pattern of misconduct due to three Article 15 actions.

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 10 March 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, 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 commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 14 March 2011, 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 7 April 2011, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for pattern of misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and an RE code of 3. 

6.  The applicant's record shows he was absent without leave (AWOL) during the period 5 January 2010 through 8 January 2008.  He returned to his unit.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Article 15, dated 16 February 2010, AWOL (100105-100109).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-2, 30 days of extra duty (suspended) and 30 days of restriction, (FG). 

2.  Article 15, dated 5 April 2010, violating a regulation (100315).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1 (suspended), 45 days of extra duty (suspended), (FG).

3.  Summarized Article 15, dated 7 February 2011, dereliction of duty (101203).  The punishment consisted of 7 days extra duty.

4.  Six negative counseling statements dated between 10 January 2010 and 7 March 2011, for being AWOL; initiation of separation action; attempting to enter a federal installation using false identification; and dereliction of duty.

5.  A memorandum, dated 14 November 2009, subject: Notification of Command Referral for Mental Health Evaluation indicates the applicant’s attempted suicide of 8 January 2010, causing a referral for an evaluation.
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an FB Form 1462-E, Request for Mental Health Evaluation, dated 10 January 2010; statement on a sworn statement form, undated; counseling statement, undated; health assessment, undated; and DA Form 638, Recommendation for Award, dated 26 October 2010.

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.

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 documents and the issues 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 three Article 15 actions for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and numerous negative counseling statements.

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 having issues adjusting to a new unit and decided to go AWOL that caused him to be discharged.  However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.  

5.  The applicant’s medical conditions regarding his mental health while on active duty does 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, but was discharged for the pattern of misconduct.

6.  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.  

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
















SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review         Date:  4 October 2013        Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel:  None

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)		AR20130006308

Page 2 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1