IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 June 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140006987 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 characterization of service from general, under honorable conditions to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he deserves a second chance to be a better Soldier than the first time. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 17 April 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 2 July 2012 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14 paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: 526th Engineer Company, 92nd Engineer Battalion, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, Fort Stewart, GA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 15 March 2011, 4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 3 months, 18 days h. Total Service: 1 year, 3 months, 18 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-2 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 12N10, Horizontal Construction m. GT Score: 94 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR 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 15 March 2011, for a period of 4 years. He was 20 years old at the time and a HS Graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 12N10, Horizontal Construction. His record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements; he achieved the rank of PV2/E-2. 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 22 May 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 a pattern of misconduct. Specifically for the following offenses: a. being absent from his appointed place of duty on (120123 and 120131), and b. being absent from his appointed place of duty on divers occasions between (120210 and 120212). 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 23 May 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 29 May 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 2 July 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. A FG Article 15 dated, 11 April 2012, for without authority, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 4 (120212, 120210, 120131, and 120131); the punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of one half month pay for two months (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 45 days. 2. A CG Article 15 dated, 21 February 2012, for without authority, leaving his appointed place of duty (120123); the punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $347 pay, extra duty and restriction for 14 days. 3. He received several negative counseling statements dated between 24 January 2012 and 24 February 2012, for leaving his place of duty, failing to report several times, failing to obey an order from an NCO, and failing to follow a post guideline. 4. DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 18 April 2012, indicating at the time there was no evidence the applicant had a cognitive disorder or a severe mental disease or defect. From a psychiatric perspective, the applicant met retention requirements and commands full capacity. He was cleared for any administrative or judicial actions deemed appropriate by command. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 149 dated, 11 April 2014 and a DD Form 214 dated, 2 July 2012. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any information with his 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 issues and documents 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 of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by two Articles 15 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 he deserves a second chance to be a better Soldier than the first time. Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. There is no basis to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 5. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 6. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 12 June 2015 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) AR20140006987 Page 2 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1