IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 12 August 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140000209
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 upgrade of his general discharge to a fully honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states his misconduct consisted of minor offenses and the preponderance of his service shows meritorious character and honorable service. Additionally, the supporting statements will attest to his good post-service conduct.
3. The applicant provides a two-page letter explaining his application and four third-party statements of support.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 November 2006 for a period of 4 years and training as a Bradley Fighting Vehicle Infantryman. He completed his basic training at Fort Sill, OK and his advanced individual training at Fort Knox, KY.
2. He was transferred to Korea for his first assignment and then to Fort Stewart, GA.
3. On 3 August 2009, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer (NCO), and for being disrespectful in language and deportment toward an NCO.
4. On 17 June 2010, he was convicted by a summary court-martial of communicating a threat to an NCO.
5. On 15 July 2010, the applicants commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 14-12b, for a pattern of misconduct.
6. On 16 July 2010 after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant declined the opportunity to submit a statement in his own behalf.
7. On 19 July 2010, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed the applicant be furnished a general discharge.
8. Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 25 August 2010 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, due to pattern of misconduct. He had served 3 years, 9 months, and 11 days of active service.
9. The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on 12 November 2010 for an upgrade of his discharge contending that his character of service should be honorable to reflect his actual service. After reviewing all of the available evidence, the ADRB unanimously determined that his discharge was both equitable and proper under the circumstances and on 13 July 2011, denied his request.
10. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
a. Chapter 14 establishes policy and procedures for separating personnel for misconduct. Specific categories included minor infractions, a pattern of misconduct, involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities, and commission of a serious offense, which includes drug offenses. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
b. 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 applicant's contentions and supporting documents have been noted; however, they are not supported by the evidence of record and thus are not sufficiently mitigating when compared to the repeated nature of his offenses. The applicant's overall service simply does not rise to the level of a fully honorable discharge.
2. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights. Accordingly, the reason for his separation and characterization of his service was appropriate for the circumstances of his case.
3. In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting the applicant a fully 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 that 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) AR20140000209
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140000209
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000209
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 15 July 2010, the applicants commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 14-12b, for a pattern of misconduct. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009768
The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to fully honorable and that his combat service be reflected on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). On 9 July 1999, the appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request for a conditional waiver and directed that he be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, for pattern of misconduct. Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations - Separation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009063
The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-17, due to other designated physical or mental conditions. He was steadily seeking help from behavioral health for various reasons, such as panic disorder, insomnia, depression, etc, due to the treatment of his command and he was discharged from mental health the day he exited the service. Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007271
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The board recommended the applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general). The applicant contends his general discharge under honorable conditions should be upgraded to fully honorable and his RE code should be changed because he was discharged based on a civilian matter for which he was never charged and was resolved.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003656
On 20 October 2004, his commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him from the service for misconduct pattern of misconduct under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 14-12b. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. He failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application and the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020740
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge. The applicant provides no additional documents with his application.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013393
The applicant states her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) should be corrected to show a fully honorable discharge to coincide with her Honorable Discharge Certificate from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) in 2008. On 12 July 2002, the applicant's commander notified her that he was initiating action to discharge her from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12b, by reason of a...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130009949
I by the arms and neck with his hands (130202) e. Failure to report two times (121012) f. Being disrespectful in language to an NCO (121003) g. Being arrested for assault in Tacoma, WA (120930) 2. On 9 April 2013, the separation authority, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate;...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130003142
The separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. On 22 February 2011, a Company Grade Article for failing to report 4 times (110209, 110131, 110130, 110128). A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldiers separation specifically allows such characterization.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020741
On 23 February 2010, 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, for misconduct, a pattern of misconduct. On 2 March 2010, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of misconduct - pattern of misconduct of a serious offense and...