Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/03/23	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "The reason I was discharged was because I was involved in a relationship with a DEP.  We dated for a long period of time and had plans of maintaining a long term relationship.  When we broke up (initiated by me) she decided to come forward with our relationship out of vengeance.  I understand my actions were against policy.  At no time did I take advantage of this person.  It was not a fly by night fling.  We were together in an adult consensual relationship.  I have since graduated with my BA, purchased a home, remarried, and now have a three year old daughter.  I have absolutely zero intentions of rejoining any branch of the military or working in a government capacity.  I am making this request because I have grown up.  I have become a model citizen and contribute, in a positive way, to my community.  Having an RE-3 and an under honorable discharge is something that should no longer apply.  Having this changed will enable me to move on with my life in a positive way.  As an Army recruiter I was top in my BN.  Every single thing I did in the Army leading up to my discharge was honorable.  I dated a person I was attracted to and had common interests with.  There was no attempt at rehabilitation on behalf of my leadership team.  I was given a chance to explain my situation, but was cut off before I could explain the nature of the relationship.  Had I been given more opportunity to explain, I feel the outcome may have been different.  I did work with another recruiter that took advantage of an underage recruit and was docked pay.  He returned to his recruiting station and moved on to become a station commander.   My infraction was not nearly as severe, but the punishment was tenfold what he received.  Had I been able to stay in the Army I feel I would have been able to contribute greatly to the success of the recruiting mission.  I did contribute to the mission by consistently achieving well above mission box prior to my discharge.  I do not feel the punishment fit the crime and was treated very poorly by a recruiting BN that had just been on the news for multiple infractions.  These infractions included a recruiter helping fake a diploma, fake a urinalysis, and coached a recruit on how to lie on his application.  All of this was on camera and audio recordings.  My infraction was tiny compared to the charges that were facing the BN.  I feel they saw this as an opportunity to make an example rather than looking at the entire picture of me as a Soldier.  They took my rank and walked directly into new recruiter orientation.  I was treated as if I had done everything that the recruiter on the news had done.  Please take careful consideration in this matter.  I am doing everything I can to be a good person and build a good life.  I feel that having this discharge is like being a felon.  I dated a person who was of age and consensual.  The DEP I dated did go to basic training and then on to AIT for Military Intelligence.  She is a great Soldier and I am proud to have her protecting our nation.  I have forgiven her and myself.  Now it is time for the military to forgive me and allow me to move on.  I gave one month short of 8 years of my life to serving my country.  I had to kick, fight, and scratch my way to a strong civilian life.  Thank you for your time and consideration."

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: 060720
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070223   Chapter: 14-12c     AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: US Army Recruiting Company Colorado Springs, US Army Recruiting Battalion Denver, Building 1012, Room 306, Fort Carson, CO  

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060613, wrongfully had an unauthorized relationship with FS MO by engaging in a romantic relationship (060126 - 060407); reduction to E-4; forfeiture of $1,015 pay per month for 2 months; restriction and extra duty for 45 days, both suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (060910); written reprimand; (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  23
Current ENL Date: 040814    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2  Yrs, 6   Mos, 10 Days ?????
Total Service:  		7  Yrs, 11 Mos, 7   Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ARNG 990316 - 990810/NA
                                       IADT   990811 - 000113/HD
                                       ARNG 000114 - 040504/HD
                                       USAR 040505 - 040813/NA
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 79R20 Recruiter   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR

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 20 July 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, for violating a lawful general regulation by wrongfully having an unauthorized relationship with FS MO by engaging in a romantic relationship (060126 – 060407), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 30 November 2006, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board, 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 December 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
       
       The record contains a memorandum of reprimand dated, 14 June 2006.

       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 carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infraction of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offense.  
       
       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 his 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 acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life as summarized in his application.
       
       The applicant contends he worked with another recruiter that took advantage of an underage recruit and was docked pay; he was then allowed to return to his recruiting station and moved on to become a station commander; however, 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.
       
       The analyst noted that the reason the applicant was discharged was because he was involved in an unauthorized relationship and noted that even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. 
        
       The applicant contends that his punishment did not fit the crime and he was treated very poorly by his recruiting battalion that had just been on the news for multiple infractions.  His infraction was tiny compared to the charges that the battalion was facing; he feels they saw this as an opportunity to make an example rather than looking at the entire picture of him as a Soldier.  The analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       
       Moreover, the applicant was separated from the Army under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct (serious offense) with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)” and the separation code is "JKQ."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  
       
       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: 17 August 2012         Location: Washington, D. C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, discharge certificate, NGB 22, discharge orders 026-0003, and a DD Form 214

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:



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 AR20120005832
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 4 pages