IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	25 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130007739
___________________________________________________________________________

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 general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that an upgrade of his discharge would help with his job seeking.  He contends his documented mental anguish and depression caused by military service makes it hard for him to find a job.  He was discharged due to patterns of misconduct which was caused by simple mistakes he made due to depression and mental anguish.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		18 April 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			15 February 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14,						paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			72nd MAC, 1st EN Bn, 4th IBCT, Fort Riley, KS
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	18 February 2009, 3 years and 16 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 11 months, 28 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 11 months, 28 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	12B10, Combat Engineer
m. GT Score:				116
n. Education:				GED
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (091112-101107)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, ICM-w/CS, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR
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 18 February 2009, for a period of 3 years and 16 weeks.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED).  His record indicates he served in Iraq; earned several awards to include an ARCOM and achieved the rank of PFC/E-3.  He completed a total of 2 years, 11 months, and 28 days of active military service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 19 January 2012, 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 for disobeying an order from a noncommissioned officer and failing to be at his appointed place of duty on diverse occasions.

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 30 January 2012, the applicant was given the opportunity to consult 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 10 February 2012, 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 15 February 2012, 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 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.  Summarized Article 15, imposed on 6 May 2011, for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 3 (110303, 110314, and 110412).  The punishment consisted of extra duty for 14 days and restriction for 14 days (suspended).

2.  Article 15, imposed on 28 November 2011, for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 2 (110915 and 111013) and disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer (111024).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of    E-2, forfeiture of $383.00 pay per month for one month (suspended), extra duty for 14 days, restriction for 14 days, and an oral reprimand (CG). 

3.  Two negative counseling statements dated between 10 December 2010 and 5 December 2011, for failing to follow an order or regulation, making false official statements, and failing to be at his appointed place of duty, 

4.  A request for psychiatric consultation, signed by the applicant's commander which indicates the applicant was referred for crying, use of drugs, poor attitude, suicidal, unhappy, anxiousness, and marital problems.  

5.  The available record does not contain a Mental Status Evaluation Report.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 149.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were provided with the 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 document 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 his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by 2 Article 15's for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and several 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 his misconduct was the result of his mental anguish and depression caused by the military.  Evidence in the record shows the applicant was referred for psychiatric consultation by his unit commander.  However, the results of the consultation were not found in the available records.  Furthermore, the applicant had other avenues to seek relief from his mental anguish and depression through the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers.  The record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition.

5.  The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would make it easier to find a job.  However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

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.

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:   25 October 2013         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel: None

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:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
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)		AR20130007739



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1