IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE:	      20 December 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120010931 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states:

* he never intended to cause any trouble or be part of any problem in his unit
* he was charged with simple assault against his wife the same week he was about to be promoted to specialist/E-4
* he was never in any serious trouble during his military service without his wife having something to do with it
* the information used to discharge him doesn't match the level of his misconduct – one of the reasons being out of uniform on a few occasions – he asks how big of an issue is being out of uniform
* he served in combat and received multiple awards and decorations
* his unit wanted to promote him on several occasions while they were overseas, but one of the unit noncommissioned officers told him he needed to be more than an outstanding Soldier, he also had to be a good husband
* he fought very hard to join the military and he was never known to be a trouble maker

3.  The applicant provides:

* DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award)
* statement from a friend regarding his reenlistment
* Southern Christian College Character recommendation form
* Southern Christian College Student of the Month certificate
* Southern Christian College Certificate of completion
* Life-Saving Blood Donor Certificate
* undated petition for divorce
* local newspaper article

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 September 2004 and he held military occupational specialty 92Y (Unit Supply Specialist).  He also executed a reenlistment on 5 January 2007.

2.  He served in Kuwait/Iraq from 28 October 2005 to 1 October 2006.  He was awarded or authorized the Army Commendation Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Iraq Campaign Medal, Army Service Ribbon, and Overseas Service Ribbon.  He attained the rank of private first class/E-3.

3.  His records show he was frequently counseled by members of his chain of command for various infractions including:

* failing to resolve family issues
* failing to maintain adequate living conditions
* failing to lock a container with sensitive items in it
* failure to secure work place
* failure to follow instructions
* failure to be in the correct uniform
* making threats to kill his wife

4.  On 11 February 2007, he was apprehended by Military Police for domestic assault.  He and his wife were involved in a physical altercation, pushing each other.  He was charged with domestic assault and given a no-contact order.

5.  On 22 March 2007, the applicant's immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 
14-12b, by reason of misconduct – pattern of misconduct.  Specifically, he cited the applicant's charge for simple assault, not maintaining adequate living conditions, communicating a threat, not being in the proper uniform, and not securing the supply room.  He recommended a general discharge under honorable conditions.

6.  On 22 March 2007, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander's intent to separate him.  He subsequently consulted with legal counsel and he was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action for misconduct, the type of discharge he could receive, the possible effects of this discharge, and the procedures and rights available to him.  He voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon receiving a general discharge.  He elected to submit a statement in his own behalf, wherein he stated:

* he was in the process of divorcing his wife
* he continuously tried to work things out with his wife
* he wanted to continue his military service

7.  He further indicated he understood he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge under honorable conditions were issued to him and he could be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under Federal and State laws as a result of the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

8.  On 26 March 2007, his immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 for misconduct – pattern of misconduct.  The immediate commander recommended a general discharge under honorable conditions.

9.  His battalion commander recommended approval with the issuance of a general discharge under honorable conditions.

10.  On 27 March 2007, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, by reason of misconduct – pattern of misconduct – and directed the characterization of his service as general under honorable conditions.  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 4 April 2007.

11.  His DD Form 214 confirms he was discharged by reason of misconduct in accordance with paragraph 14-12b of Army Regulation 635-200 with a character of service of under honorable conditions.  This form further shows he completed 2 years, 6 months, and 27 days of creditable active service during this period.

12.  On 17 December 2010, the Army Discharge Review Board reviewed his discharge and determined it was proper and equitable.  Accordingly, it denied his petition for an upgrade.


13.  He provides:

	a.  a DA Form 638, dated 4 February 2006, awarding him the Army Commendation Medal;

	b.  a statement of support, dated 27 March 2008, from a friend who describes the applicant as a religious person with a special personality;

	c.  a character recommendation form, dated 14 November 2010, wherein the author describes the applicant as a helpful and friendly person with an excellent personality;

	d.  a certificate, dated March 2012, and a newspaper article which show he was selected as Student of the Month at Southeastern Christian College;

	e.  a certificate, dated 17 December 2010, which shows he completed a program called the Workbased Learning Completer;

	f.  a certificate acknowledging his dedication as a blood donor; and

	g.  an undated petition for divorce.

14.  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 included 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 for a Soldier discharged for patterns of misconduct; however, the discharge authority may direct an honorable or general discharge if such are merited by the Soldier's overall record.

15.  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.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant displayed a pattern of misconduct ranging from failing to secure his work area as a supply specialist and failing to be in the correct uniform to the more serious misconduct of communicating a threat and ultimately being charged with simple assault.  Accordingly, his chain of command initiated separation action against him.

2.  Before initiating separation action, his chain of command ensured he was appropriately counseled about his deficiencies and he was advised of the consequences of his actions.

3.  The evidence of record further shows the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with Army standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

4.  Based on his record of indiscipline, the applicant's service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, he is not entitled to an honorable discharge.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X    _  ___ X_  _  ___ X__      DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      ___________X__________
                 CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120010931



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120010931



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1