IN THE CASE OF:	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:	4 April 2014

      CASE NUMBER:	AR20130012811
___________________________________________________________________________

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

2.  The applicant states, in effect, during the period which led to his separation proceedings, his mother was battling cancer, and he also found out his grandfather was diagnosed with stage four colon, liver, and lung cancer, and when his fiancée broke up with him, he felt like he could not take any more.  None of his NCOs were there for him.  He was being treated for depression at the behavioral health clinic and the Army Health Center at Fort Huachuca, AZ.  He went there himself and was referred by a counselor for further treatment.  He completed the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP).  When he returned to his unit, he was put on a 24-hour suicide watch.  He was under the impression that he would be receiving an honorable discharge for medical reasons.  He was led to believe that until the day of his discharge.  During out-processing, he was told by the DEERS person that the discharge would be a general discharge.  He felt it to be an injustice, since he was always told by his command and mental health that he would be getting an honorable discharge. 

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	11 July 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	17 May 2013
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Condition, Not a Disability, AR 635-200, Paragraph 
			5-17, JFV, RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	B Co, 309th MI Bn, 111th MI Bde, Fort Huachuca, AZ 
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	30 July 2012, 3 years, 34 weeks
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	0 years, 9 months, 18 days
	h.	Total Service:	0 years, 9 months, 18 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	None
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-2
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	None
	m.	GT Score:	109
	n.	Education:	HS Graduate
	o.	Overseas Service:	None
	p.	Combat Service:	None
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	NDSM
	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 30 July 2012, for a period of 3 years and 34 weeks.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  His record indicates he was an MI student at Fort Huachuca when his was discharged.  He completed 9 months, and 18 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence of record shows that on 2 May 2013, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, AR 635-200, by reason of physical condition, not a disability for being diagnosed by competent medical authority with an adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood, as well as, insomnia.  In addition, he received counseling for the following:

	a.	on divers occasions for failing to maintain room standards (121117-130209);
	b.	on divers occasions for failing to be at his appointed place of duty (130105-130417); and
	c.	on divers occasions for falling asleep while on extra duty (130226-130404).

2.  The commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.  

3.  On 3 May 2013, the applicant waived his right to consult with legal counsel, indicated he understood the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 10 May 2013, the separation authority directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 17 May 2013, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

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.  DA Form 3822, Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 14 March 2013, indicates the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood, and insomnia, and that the applicant met psychiatric criteria for expeditious administrative separation IAW Chapter 5-17, AR 635-200 and recommended separation accordingly.

2.  Article 15, dated 14 February 2013, for wrongfully huffing CO2 from a can of compressed air (130112).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $758 per month for one month (suspended), 45 days of extra duty, restriction, and ASAP, (FG). 

3.  Multiple negative counseling statements, dated between 2 December 2012 and 17 April 2013, for missing medical appointments; being previously counseled for a recommendation for involuntary separation UP Chapter 5-17 and its process; being late to formations; sleeping on extra duty; extra duty schedule; committing unsafe act; receiving a FG Article 15; unsatisfactory room inspection; living in an unhealthy living environment; and failing to obey orders or regulations. 

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided DD Form 214 for service under current review, and pages 3 and 4 of DD Form 2807-1, Report of Medical History, dated 11 April 2013.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant provided none.  

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-17 specifically provides that a Soldier may be separated for other physical or mental conditions not amounting to a disability, which interferes with assignment to or performance of duty and requires that the diagnosis be so severe that the Soldier’s ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired.  

2.  AR 635-200, paragraph 5-1, states that a Soldier being separated under this paragraph will be awarded a characterization of service of honorable, under honorable conditions, or an uncharacterized description of service if in entry-level status.  

3.  A general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally inappropriate for individuals separated under the provisions of Chapter 5-17 unless properly notified of the specific factors in the service that warrant such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after a careful review of all the available records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issues and documents submitted, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  A mental status evaluation by competent medical authority diagnosed the applicant with an adjustment disorder with anxiety, depressed mood and insomnia.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation under provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, by reason of other designated physical or mental condition not amounting to a disability, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge and informed the applicant as to the specific factors in the service record that would warrant such discharge.  Furthermore, an honorable discharge may be granted only in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty.  The applicant’s record indicates that no such unusual circumstances were present and his service did not warrant an honorable discharge.  

3.  The applicant contends none of his NCOs were there for him during the period when his mother was battling cancer, his grandfather was diagnosed with stage four colon, liver, and lung cancer, and his fiancée broke up with him.  He felt like he could not take any more.  However, the evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.  

4.  The applicant contends the discharge was unjust because he was led to believe he was receiving an honorable discharge due to medical reasons.  However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he may have been unjustly discriminated.  In fact, the applicant’s subsequent response, dated 2 May 2013, acknowledging that he received notice from his commander of the contemplated action to separate him with a general, under honorable conditions confirms he was aware of the type of separation he was receiving.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge.  

5.  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 record confirms that all the requirements of law and regulations were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

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




SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review       Date:  4 April 2014       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)		AR20130012811

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1