IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	6 November 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130008208
___________________________________________________________________________

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, his discharge should be changed due to the fact he was going through behavioral health issues and being in a behavioral health program before and during the time he was discharged.  He never received the help he needed from the programs he was enrolled in.  He needs help mentally and physically; and is a war veteran in need of help.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 		29 April 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			2 July 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Pattern of Misconduct , AR 635-200, Chapter 14, 						paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			E Co, 703rd Brigade Support Battalion, 4th Brigade 						Combat Team, Fort Stewart, GA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	22 August 2006, 6 years and 21 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	3 years, 8 months, 
h. Total Service:			3 years, 8 months,
i. Time Lost:				1 day
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	88M10, Motor Transport Operator
m. GT Score:				109
n. Education:				GED Certificate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (070908-081220)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, NDSM, ICM-W/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		No
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 August 2006, for a period of 6 years and 21 weeks.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry with a GED Certificate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 88M10, Motor Transport Operator.  His record also shows that he served a combat tour, earned several awards including an ARCOM, and he achieved the rank of SPC/E-4.  He was serving at Fort Stewart, GA when his discharge was initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 6 April 2010, 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 the following offense:

     a.  having multiple counts of failure to report

     b.  being disrespectful towards noncommissioned officers (NCO)

     c.  being previously absent without leave (AWOL) for a period of one day

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 6 April 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement on his 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 of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 8 April 2010, 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’s record of service indicates one day of time lost for being AWOL.  The specific dates of the AWOL period and mode of return are not contained in the available record.  Also, the record does not contain any actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  However, he was separated as a PVT/E-1 and the action that caused his reduction is not contained in the service record.

6  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 21 April 2010, 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, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and an RE code of 3.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  A DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 10 March 2010 which indicated the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with anxiety, adjustment Insomnia, ADHD, and depression, cannabis dependence per ASAP, alcohol dependence, and amphetamine dependence.  The report also indicated the applicant was experiencing mild symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  However, he psychiatrically cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by command.


2.  He received 16 negative counseling statements which were completed between 7 October 2009 through 24 March 2010 for failing to obey an order or regulation on more than one occasion, conduct unbecoming a Soldier, dereliction of duty, perception of an inappropriate relationship, disobeying a lawful order, failing to report to his place of duty on multiple times, and being separated under Chapter 14-12b.

3.  The evidence of record indicated in a counseling statement, dated 24 March 2010 and the Mental Status Evaluation that the applicant received a court martial and was confined for 30 days.

4.  An Aiken County Sheriff’s Office Incident Report/Supplementary Report, dated 9 September 2008, which indicated the applicant was charged with unlawfully carrying a pistol.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an online application with hand written signature page.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any 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, 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 misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by 16 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 discharge should be changed due to the fact he was going through behavioral health issues and being in a behavioral health program before and during the time he was discharged.  The evidence of record indicated the applicant was diagnosed while active duty with several mental conditions and substance abuse dependencies.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reason for the discharge, these conditions and substance abuse dependencies did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.

5.  The applicant further contends he never received the help he needed from the programs he was enrolled in.  The evidence of record (Mental Status Evaluation) indicated the applicant was enrolled in ASAP after testing positive and missed two consecutive sessions.  The applicant was referred to outpatient behavioral health treatment and ASAP upon discharge.

6.  The applicant also contends he needs help mentally and physically; and he is a war veteran in need of help.  However, 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.

7.  Furthermore, 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.

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:  6 November 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)		AR20130008208



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1