Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2011/10/31 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he wants to be eligible to receive the GI Bill benefits so that he can go to school for his associates degree in culinary art and has already started school. He just recently received a letter informing him that he was denied his GI Bill and he now has to pay out of his own pocket. He deployed and did his time and would like to go to school for his associates degree so that he can become a chef and try to do something with his life. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 110406 Discharge Received: Date: 110504 Chapter: 14-12c AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense) RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: ????? Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 110228, wrongfully had sexual intercourse with a woman not his wife between (100701-100731), reduction to Private (E-1), forfeiture of $733.00 pay per month for two months, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (110828), extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 19 Current ENL Date: 080521 Current ENL Term: 3 Years 16 weeks Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 11 Mos, 13 Days ????? Total Service: 2 Yrs, 11 Mos, 13 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11B10 Infantryman GT: 85 EDU: ????? Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (091112-091219) Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ICMDLw/CS, ASR, OSR, MUC V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant stated in his issue that he has already started school to obtain an associates degree in culinary art so that he can become a chef. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 6 April 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense; in that he wrongfully had sexual intercourse with a woman not his wife between (100701-100731), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 8 April 2011, the applicant waived legal, was advised of 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 and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 12 April 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The record contains a Military Police Report in reference to the applicant's offenses of; sexual assault of a child, solicitation of a minor, false official statement, adultry and contributing to the delinquency of a minor dated 30 September 2010. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 of this regulation 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 absence 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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The analyst determined 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. By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. 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. The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he wants to be eligible to receive the GI Bill benefits so that he can go to school for his associates degree in culinary art and has already started school. He deployed and did his time and would like to go to school. The analyst considered the applicant’s quality of service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge. Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should continue to contact his local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 1 June 2012 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 27 October 2011. VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. IX. Board Decision Board Vote: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) X. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change XI. Certification Signature Approval Authority: EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board BONITA E. TROTMAN Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army Secretary Recorder Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20110021882 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 3 pages