IN THE CASE OF:	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:	1 November 2013

      CASE NUMBER:	AR20130007749
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the examiner’s Discussion and Recommendation that follows, the Board determined the discharge is now inequitable.  The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority.  






      
      
      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 received a company grade Article 15, for failing to report from 12 March 2012 to 13 March 2012.  A few days later, he was informed he was being considered AWOL and that he would be separated from the Army with a general, under honorable conditions.  His reason for being absent was due to having family and personal mental health issues since returning from his previous deployment.  His chain of command showed no concern or interest in providing the appropriate care or counseling he needed and proceeded with the separation.  He believes being absent for 24 hours is insufficient evidence to be discharged for misconduct.  His discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in four years and four months of service.  Not only did it devastate his career, but caused a lot of stress on him and his family.  He served a 12-month tour in Afghanistan, and believes he served his country well.  Based on reviewing his military career, it would reflect that he truly deserves an honorable discharge.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	22 April 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	12 July 2012
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200 
			paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	HHC, 1st Bn, 36th Infantry Regiment, 1st BCT, 1st 
			Armored Division, Fort Bliss, TX
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	16 October 2010, 3 years
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 8 months, 27 days
	h.	Total Service:	4 years, 4 months, 21 days
	i.	Time Lost:	1 day
	j.	Previous Discharges:	RA (080221-101015) / HD
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-5
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	25U20, Signal Support System Specialist
	m.	GT Score:	108
	n.	Education:	GED 
	o.	Overseas Service:	SWA
	p.	Combat Service:	Afghanistan (100412-110401)
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	ARCOM; AGCM; NDSM; ACM-CS; GWOTSM 
			NPDR; ASR; OSR; NATO MDL; CAB; MUC
	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 21 February 2008, and reenlisted on 16 October 2010, for a period of 3 years.  He was 20 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED).  He served in Afghanistan and earned an ARCOM.  He completed 4 years, 4 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 15 June 2012, 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 (serious offense), specifically for being AWOL (120312-120313).  

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 18 June 2012, 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 18 June 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 12 July 2012, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and an RE code of 3.  

6.  The applicant's record shows he was absent without leave (AWOL) during the period 12 March 2012 through 13 March 2012.  He returned to his unit the following day.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Article 15, dated 29 May 2012, AWOL (120312-120313).  The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $580, 14 days of extra duty and restriction, (CG).  

2.  DA Form 1059, Service School Academic Evaluation Report, dated 28 October 2011, which indicates the applicant achieved the course standards of the warrior leader course.

3.  One negative counseling statement, dated 22 March 2012, for failing to report, AWOL, and disobeying an order or regulation.


EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a copy of his separation packet for the discharge under current review. 

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 serious incident 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 an Article 15 action for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

3.  The applicant provided no 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.  

4.  The applicant contends that he was having family and personal mental health issues that affected his behavior and ultimately 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 contends the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire Army career.  Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  

6.  The applicant also contends that he had good service which included serving his country well in Afghanistan.  The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incident that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the serious incident of misconduct and the documented action under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

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.


SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

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

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  4	No Change:  1
Reason Change:	4	No Change:  1
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		Yes
Change Characterization to:	Honorable
Change Reason to:			Secretarial Authority
Change Authority for Separation:	AR 635-200, Chapter 5, Paragraph 5-3
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Other:					Separation Program Designator (SPD) code JFF




















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)		AR20130007749

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1