IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	16 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006836
___________________________________________________________________________

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 his general, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant did not provide any issues for the Board's consideration.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			8 April 2013
b. Discharge Received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				13 December 2011
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200,									Para 14-12B, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:				A Btry, 3rd Bn, 27th FA Regiment (HIMARS)							Fort Bragg, NC
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		16 June 2009, 6 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:		2 Years, 5 Months, 4 Days
h. Total Service:				2 Years, 5 Months, 4 Days
i. Time Lost:					AWOL (111021-111114), 25 Days
j. Previous Discharges:			None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		13M10 MLRS/HIMARS Crewman
m. GT Score:					97
n. Education:					HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				None
p. Combat Service:				None
q. Decorations/Awards:			NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, MUC
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		NA
s. Performance Ratings:			NA
t. Counseling Statements:			Yes
u. Prior Board Review:				No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 June 2009 for a period of 6 years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He completed 2 years, 5 months, and 4 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 18 October 2011, 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 misconduct-pattern of misconduct for failing to repair on (110513 and 110607); disobeying a commissioned officer on (110611 and 110629); disobeying an NCO on (110611); dereliction in the performance of duties on (110319 and 110511), and making false official statements on (110628 and 110707). 

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 20 October 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 26 October 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 13 December 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
21 October 2011 through 14 November 2011.  Mode of return is unknown.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action) showing the applicant went AWOL on 21 October 2011 through 14 November 2011.

2.  Article 15, dated 28 June 2011, disobeying a commissioned officer and dereliction in the performance of duty; extra duty and restriction for 14 days and an oral reprimand, (CG), NIF, obtained from commander's separation statement 

3.  12 July 2011, vacation of suspension, disobeying a commissioned officer; reduction to PV2 and forfeiture of $383.00 pay, (CG), NIF, obtained from commander's separation statement 
      
4.  Article 15, dated 14 September 2011, disobeying an NCO and making false official statements; reduced to PVT, extra duty and restriction for 45 days, (FG), NIF, obtained from commander's separation statement

5.  Twenty-two negative counseling statements covering his enlistment, for failing to repair, being in an improper uniform, disobeying lawful orders from officers, disobeying official commands from officer, violating the visitation policy, disobeying NCOs, and insubordination.  
      

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293 and a DD Form 214

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None listed  

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, and the 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 his service below that meriting a general or a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by numerous incidents of misconduct.
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.  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:  16 October 2013       Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: No

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)		AR20130006836



Page 2 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1