Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2011/12/27 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he requests his discharge be upgraded to honorable. He strived to be the best Soldier he could be. He listed some achievements while deployed in support of OIF 06-08 and OIF 08-10. The applicant contends that he was accused of an inappropriate relationship while deployed. The incident was investigated and proved to be unfounded; however, he was eventually discharged a a result. He admits he made a mistake and would like his discharge upgraded to get a better job to support his family. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: None See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 100317 Discharge Received: Date: 100527 Chapter: 14-12b AR: 635-200 Reason: Pattern of Misconduct RE: SPD: JKA Unit/Location: HHD, 91st Military Police Bn, Fort Drum, NY Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 100507, wrongfully compromising or appearing to compromise the integrity of the supervisory authority of the chain of command, by having an inappropriate relationship with a Specialist on or about (081105 and 100426), violated a no contact order (090520, 090701, 091021, 091210, 100426), reduction to E-5, forfeiture of $1207 x months (suspended) until (100521), 14 days extra duty (FG). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 24 Current ENL Date: 090331 Current ENL Term: 06 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 01 Mos, 27 Days ????? Total Service: 04 Yrs, 10 Mos, 15 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA 050713-090330/HD Highest Grade: E-6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 13B2P Military Police GT: 91 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (061126-080216) and (081105-091019) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, NOPDR, ASR, OSR, CAB V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 17 March 2010, 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 pattern of misconduct for wrongfully comprimising or appearing to compromise the integrity of the supervisory authority of the chain of command, by having an inappropriate relationship with a specialist on or about (081105 and 100426) and violating a no contact order (090520, 090701, 091021, 091210, 100426), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 18 May 2010, the applicant waived his rights to consult with legal counsel, and did not submit a statement in 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 of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 19 May 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The record contains a Commander's Inquiry dated 24 August 2009. 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 issues and documents 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 the former Soldier’s 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 acknowledges the applicant's in service accomplishments as stated in his application. However, the analyst did not find the said issue sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. The analyst noted the applicant's employment issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Furthermore, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Therefore, the analyst determined 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: 6 June 2012 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DA Form 293 dated, 3 December 2011, DD Form 214, copies of various OMPF documents with various dates. 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: ????? Other: ????? RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI. Certification Signature Approval Authority: ARCHIE L. DAVIS III 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 AR20120000001 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages