AR20140002055

IN THE CASE OF: Mr.

BOARD DATE: 11 February 2015

CASE NUMBER: AR20140002055
___________________________________________________________________________

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 APPLICANTS 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 his self-authored statement, in pertinent part and in effect, his discharge is improper because it was based on an isolated incident with no other adverse action during his 12 years of honorable service. He served three deployments in Iraq; received four ARCOMs; three AGCMs; and two AAMs. He received a DUI, an incident while off-duty. He had issues with alcohol because of his spouses infidelity while he was deployed to Iraq. His unit provided no assistance. Since his discharge, he sought help and completed 54 hours of an intensive outpatient care. He has kept up with his responsibilities as a civilian and enrolled in a university to further his education.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 17 January 2014
b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 23 January 2013
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-
12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: 696th Forward Support Co, 2nd Bn, 4th FA
Regiment, Fort Sill, OK
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 30 June 2011, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 6 months, 26 days
h. Total Service: 11 years, 11 months, 24 days
i. Time Lost: None
j. Previous Discharges: DEP (010125-010305) / NA
RA (010306-071123) / HD
ARNG (071124-090421) / HD
RA (090422-110629) / HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 91B20, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic
m. GT Score: 109
n. Education: GED
o. Overseas Service: SWA
p. Combat Service: Iraq (111018-111110), (051006-060926), and
(030406-031127)
q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-4; AAM-2; AGCM-3; NDSM; ICM-AH; ICM-
CS; GWOTEM; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR
r. Administrative Separation Board: No, unconditionally waived
s. Performance Ratings: Yes
t. Counseling Statements: Yes
u. Prior Board Review: No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 April 2009, and reenlisted on 30 June 2011, for a period of 4 years. He was 26 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED). He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91B20, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic. He served in Iraq. He earned four ARCOMs and two AAMS. He completed 11 years, 11 months, and 24 days of active and reserve service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1. The evidence contained in the applicants service record shows that on 13 December 2012 (as acknowledged by the applicant), 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 being arrested for driving under the influence (121120), and failing to report on three separate occasions (120621, 120906, and 120911).

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

3. On 14 December 2012, the applicant waived his right to consult with legal counsel, indicated he understood the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, 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 18 December 2012, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 23 January 2013, 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.

6. The applicants service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD:

1. Six negative counseling statements, dated between 7 June 2012 and 21 November 2012, for being arrested for driving under the influence; being involved in a vehicle accident; and failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on several occasions.

2. A civilian police department report, dated 21 November 2012, indicates the applicant was arrested for being suspected of driving under the influence with a state district courts preliminary docketing the charge and a previous DUI conviction on 18 June 2004.

3. Mental Status Evaluation Report, dated 4 December 2012, indicates the applicant was diagnosed with alcohol abuse, episodic, and anxiety disorder and screenings for PTSD and TBI were negative. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command.

4. One NCOER rendered during period under current review: An Annual report covering the period of 11 December 2010 to 10 December 2011. The applicant was rated as Fully Capable and received 2/2 from the senior rater.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a self-authored statement; college schedule/transcript; attorney-authored drinking driver offender assessment, undated; certificate of outpatient completion, dated 18 September 2013; record of payments for child support; an Annual NCOER for ending period 21 April 2010; Service School Academic Evaluation Report, dated 24 July 2009; APFT scorecard, dated 3 February 2011; record fire scorecard, dated 17 August 2010; ERB, dated 13 April 2010; two HD discharge certificates, dated 21 April 2009 and 23 November 2004; combat patch certificate; and two DD Forms 214 for service under current review and for service, dated 23 November 2007.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

The applicant states, in effect, since his discharge, he sought help and completed 54 hours of an intensive outpatient care, and he has kept up with his responsibilities as a civilian and enrolled in a university to further his education.

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 members 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 Soldiers 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 applicants request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicants record of service, his military records, and the documents and 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 applicants 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 applicants record of service was marred by a civilian police report that indicated he was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol 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 applicants service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.

4. The applicant contends the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire Army career with no other adverse actions. Although indicating the basis for his discharge was due to a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant’s incident of misconduct and the documented pattern of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline.

5. The applicant contends he had 12 years of honorable service which included serving three deployments in Iraq; receiving four ARCOMs; two AAMs; and three AGCM. The applicants service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the repeated incidents of misconduct as documented by the multiple negative counseling statements and the documented action regarding his arrest for a DUI incident by civil authorities.

6. The applicant contends that he was having family issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.

7. The applicant contends his unit provided no assistance. However, the evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.

8. The applicants post-service accomplishments as provided in the documents with his application indicate he has completed an outpatient counseling and aftercare sessions in September 2013, and that he is enrolled in college. The applicants post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and in the documents with the application. However, in review of the applicants entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.

9. Although, the applicant did not raise the issue of possibly dealing with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), the service record contains no evidence of the VA or other medical authority ever diagnosing that he was suffering from PTSD. The evidence he submitted only alludes to working with the Veterans system regarding a PTSD diagnosis. There is no evidence to support the discharge may have been the result of any medical condition.

10. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.

11. 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: 11 February 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) AR20140002055

Page 7 of 7 pages

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

1