IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 12 December 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20140015645 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge to be 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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he almost lost his wife and baby when his wife went into premature labor, which was during the time he went AWOL. The applicant contends the unit would not extend his leave past 30 days. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 2 September 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 30 September 2011 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (AWOL), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(1), JKD, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: 14th Engineer Battalion (Rear)(Provisional), 864th Engineer Battalion, Joint Base Lewis-McCord, WA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 21 January 2011/NIF g. Current Enlistment Service: 8 months, 10 days h. Total Service: 3 years, 6 months, 11 days i. Time Lost: 29 days j. Previous Discharges: DEP, 080205-080219, N/A RA, 080220-110120, HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 12B10, Combat Engineer m. GT Score: 134 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: SWA, Germany p. Combat Service: Iraq (081203-091202) q. Decorations/Awards: AAM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR-2 r. Administrative Separation Board: N/A s. Performance Ratings: N/A t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 February 2008 for a period of 3 years and 16 weeks. He reenlisted in the Regular Army on 21 January 2011 for an unknown period of time. He was 34 years old at the time of reenlistment and a high school graduate. He served in Germany and Iraq. He earned an AAM and completed 3 years, 6 months, and 11 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated he was serving at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 8 September 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, by reason misconduct (serious offense). Specifically for going AWOL from on or about 8 June 2011 until on or about 8 July 2011. 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 12 September 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and elected not to 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 12 September 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 30 September 2011, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(1), for misconduct (AWOL), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKD and an RE code of 3. 6. The applicant's record shows he was AWOL during the period 8 June 2011 through 7 July 2011. The record is void of the facts pertaining to how the applicant was returned to military control. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. An Article 15, dated 26 August 2011, for, without authority, absent himself from his unit from (110608-110708). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $733.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 10 October 2011, and 45 days of extra duty (FG). 2. One counseling statement, 3 August 2011, for initiation of separation proceedings. 3. Two DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 8 June 2011 and 11 July 200, changing duty status from PDY to AWOL effective 8 June 2011 and from AWOL to PDY effective 8 July 2011. 4. DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 11 August 2011, reflects that the applicant had a clear and normal thought process and was mentally responsible. However, the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with anxiety. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: 1. The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 21 August 2014, a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review. 2. Discharge Order Number 263-0024, dated 20 September 2011, Department of the Army, Joint Base Garrison, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA, discharged the applicant from the United States Army effective 30 September 2011. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None was 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. 2. After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to honorable for the following reasons: a. Length and quality of service: The applicant served 3 years, 6 months, 11 days of a 4-year enlistment, thus the preponderance of his service was honorable. b. The record confirms the applicant received an ARCOM for his tour in Iraq. 3. This recommendation is made after full consideration of all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service may now be too harsh and as a result inequitable. 4. In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the discharge is now inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, the reason for the discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. BOARD DETERMINATION AND DIRECTED ACTION After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation, the Board determined the discharge to be proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 12 December 2014 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 2 No Change: 3 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) AR20140015645 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1