IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 30 January 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140015927 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 pertinent part and in effect, he was suffering from pain caused by an injury he received during a jump at Fort Bragg. He received a 40 percent rating from the VA. He also received a 50 percent rating for suffering from PTSD. He observed two friends whose parachute malfunctioned and did not survive the impact, which caused him pain and anguish. At that point, he no longer cared what happened and for that, he regrets. He wishes now that he remained in the military with his brothers that are still serving. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 11 September 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 12 April 2000 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: HHC, 82nd Signal Bn, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 22 January 1998, 3 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 2 months, 11 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 2 months, 11 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 63B1P, Light Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic m. GT Score: 102 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 January 1998, for a period of 3 years. He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 63B1P, Light Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic. His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement. He completed 2 years, 2 months, and 11 days of active duty service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 23 March 2000, 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 incidents: a. receiving a summarized Article 15 for disobeying an NCO and b. receiving numerous negative counseling statements for lying, failing to report an accident, and being disrespectful. 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 March 2000, 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 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 March 2000, 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 April 2000, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for misconduct, 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. Summarized Article 15, dated 17 February 2000, for disobeying his first sergeant (000217). The punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and restriction, (CG). 2. Thirteen negative counseling statements, dated between 7 October 1998 and 24 November 2000, for failing to follow instructions given by his 1SG; damaging military equipment; lying to an NCO; failing to report an accident; wearing an unauthorized BDU cap; taking an excessive amount of time to complete assigned jobs; failing to following instructions; lacking attention to detail; being indebted; having an expired vehicle insurance; borrowing funds from a Private and failing to pay him; consequences of committing an adultery; being disrespectful toward an NCO; failing to perform cleanup duties; keeping an unkempt barracks room; violating barracks room policy; and damaging military equipment. 3. Two DA Form 2173, Statements of Medical Examination and Duty Status, dated 13 September 1999 and 17 April 2000, indicates the applicant incurred a right shoulder injury on 14 August 1999 and a back injury on 29 February 2000, respectively. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a packet containing his health records with a printed date of 20 August 2014. 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. 4. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, pattern of misconduct. 5. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKA" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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 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 an Article 15 for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and numerous 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 was suffering from pain caused by an injury he received during a jump at Fort Bragg. He received a 40 percent rating from the Veterans Administration (VA)—documentary evidence of that rating was not provided by the applicant. However, the fact that VA has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions he suffered while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. Therefore, this contention is without warrant toward a consideration for an upgrade of his discharge. 5. The applicant contends the Veterans Administration has granted him a service-connected disability for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The applicant did not provide a documented service-connected disability rating rendered by the VA. However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for his discharge and the characterization of service granted. The record shows that on 13 March 2000, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. Further, there are many Soldiers with the same condition that completed their service successfully. 6. The applicant desires to have remained in the Military Service, perhaps an indication of a desire to rejoin the military. However, 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 are no basis upon which 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. 7. 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: 30 January 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) AR20140015927 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1