Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/11/18	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, he requests his discharge to be upgraded to honorable, the RE Code changed to allow reentry into the military, and a change to the narrative reason.  He is a 14 year veteran with three deployments to Iraq and one to Turkey.  In his 14 years of service he was a superb leader excelling in all leadership positions.  Since his first year in the military, he never received any type of non-judicial punishment and had been an example for other Soldiers to follow.  While on assignment as a drill sergeant, he faltered and made what he believes a human mistake in his position as a drill sergeant, where he had an inappropriate relationship with a Soldier.  The relationship never went past the two of them talking either by phone or in person while with her battle buddy.  He understands he was wrong in what he did; however, he does not believe his actions were enough to be processed for separation.  He was given sufficient punishment when he was charged with UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice).  After he had finished his punishment they then decided to process him for separation, a decision he thinks was “double tapping”.  He truly believes that his command to include the Post Commanding General processed him unfairly and without any standard on their decision for separation under Chapter 14 patterns of misconduct.  The actions they determined to be a pattern of misconduct were either not true or had no weight to be processed for a separation.  For example, he was charged with speeding when in fact he never received a speeding ticket.  It was based on his CSM's assumption that he was speeding.  A second charge was that he was alone with a female private.  This was never proven and sworn statements by witnesses and the Soldier herself state that they were never alone.

In the time he had been waiting to be discharged, other service members had also been processed for separation.  A  drill sergeant was charged with violating the Army Substance Abuse Policy and Driving under the influence.  This was not his first time he had been charged with the same offenses in his career.  Under military law, Soldiers who violate the Army substance abuse policy should be discharged.  During his separation board, the board members did not ask a single question to the witnesses he had provided and he noticed one of the board members falling asleep while another one was texting.  He believes that the integrity of the board was in question and the outcome predetermined.  To his disbelief,  the CG retained the previously mentioned drill segeant and gave him a third chance to fix his career, and let him off with a warning and placed him under suspension.  

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: 	NIF   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 110916   Chapter: 14-12b      AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: D Company, 2nd Battalion, 13th Infantry Regiment, 193rd Infanty Brigade, USATC, Fort Jackson, SC  

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 110511, wrongfully engaged in illegal associations with multiple Soldiers in training through the social network website "Facebook", forfeiture of $1,956.00 x 2, and extra duty for 30 days. (FG)

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  31
Current ENL Date: 080203    Current ENL Term: Indefinite Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 07 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Total Service:  		14 Yrs, 05 Mos, 23 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-970324-000423/HD
                                       RA-000424-021017/HD
                                       RA-021018-041005/HD
                                       RA-041006-080202/HD
                                       (Immediate Reenlistment)
Highest Grade: E-6		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 42A48 Human Resources Specialist   GT: 104   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA x3 and Turkey   Combat: Iraq x 3 (040104-040329, 050306-060202 and 071112-090117) 
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-4, AAM-5, AGCM-4, MDSM, ICM-w/3CS, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR-3, ASR, OSR-3

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed by the applicant

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature.
       
       The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b by reason of pattern of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
       
       Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JKA (pattern of misconduct) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3." 

       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 available military records, the issues and document submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge.  
       
       The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to the former Soldier’s discharge from the Army.  However, the applicant’s record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  
       
       The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Barring evidence to the contrary, 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.  
       
       The applicant's contentions were carefully considered.  However, the analyst is unable to determine whether these contentions have merit because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown.  The burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will still be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record.
       
             The applicant contends that he was unfairly discharged and requests his discharge be upgraded to honorable, the RE Code changed to allow reentry into the military, and a change to the narrative reason.  However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to the former Soldier’s discharge from the Army nor has the applicant produced any evidence or documentation to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged.  The applicant’s statement alone does not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.  Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact the local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Those individuals 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.  
       
       Further, the applicant contends that another drill sergeant was charged with violating the Army Substance Abuse Policy and Driving under the influence.  This was not his first time and the CG gave him a third chance to fix his career but he was not given the same chance.  The analyst noted the applicant's contentions; however, AR 635-200, paragraph 1-16d(2), entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements states that the rehabilitative requirements may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier.  In addition, the method in which another Soldier’s case was handled is not relevant to the applicant’s case.  Applicable regulations state that each case must be decided on an individual basis considering the unique facts and circumstances of that particular case.
       
       Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that it appears 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: 16 May 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293; DD Form 214; a self-authored statement; thirteen NCOERs covering the period May 2001-May 2011; five ARCOMs and five AAMs covering various periods ; three AGCMs; three COAs; an Enlisted Record Brief; deployment orders; two letters of recognition, dated 11 June 2011 and 4 July 2011 and a letter of recommendation, dated 28 June 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: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

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 AR20110022992
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 4 pages