Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/03/26	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "Admissions (sic) seperation (sic) board was, as outlined by military legal counsel, was illegal.  I was given no chance of showing remorse for actions nor was I given any chance to show that I had no intention of ever committing another infraction. I had served a full field grade Article 15 for the offence.  At seperations (sic) board half truths were presented to the board by the military side as fact and any facts that shown truth were ommitted.  When presented with hard facts they were ignored.  I have served with complete honor and integrity for mor (sic) than a decade, service that had made me into the man I am also receiving the Purple Heart and Bronze Star Medal with Valor."

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: 110503
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 120131   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: D Co, Warrior Transition Battalion (WTB), Womack Army Medical Center, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 110808, without authority, failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty  x 13 (110202, 110203, 110204, 110207, 110208, 110209, 110210, 110211, 110214, 110215, 110216, 110217, 110222); with intent to deceive, made a false official statement to a SSG (110215); signed an official record, roster for FYRG11 (Resiliency Group), which record was totally false (110222); wrongfully and without authority wear upon his uniform a ranger tab (110401-110531); and wrongfully and without authority wear upon his uniform a senior parachutist badge (110401-110531); reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $733 pay x 2 months and extra duty for 45 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: 081017/OAD    Current ENL Term: ?? Years  1,253 days
Current ENL Service: 	03  Yrs, 03  Mos, 14  Days ?????
Total Service:  		11  Yrs, 03  Mos, 00  Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-991109-020702/HD
                                       RA-020703-060702/HD
                                       USARCG-060703-070124/NA
                                       USAR-070125-081016/NA
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 37F1P Psychological Operations Spec   GT: 105   EDU: GED   Overseas: None   Combat: Afghanistan (020801-030210), (030902-040402 both periods of combat is prior service)
Decorations/Awards: BSM-W/"V" DEV, PH, ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, ICM-W/CS, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, AFRM-W/"M" DEV, ASR, CIB

 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 3 May 2011, 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 failing to be at his appointed place of duty x 13, making false official statements x 5, and wearing unauthorized awards, ribbons, and tabs x 2, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights. 
       
       On  4 May 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, did not waive consideration of his case by 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 13 September 2011, the applicant again consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, and indicated he intended to submit a statement in his own behalf.  The intermediate and senior intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.   
       
       The evidence of record further shows that on 16 November 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of additional acts of misconduct under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, including but not limited to malingering (false injuries), false official statements, fraud against the government, and being arrested for intentional child abuse inflicting serious bodily harm. He was advised of his rights.
       
       The separation approving authority disapproved the applicant 's conditional waiver request and referred the case to the administrative separation board.  On 19 October 2011, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights.  On 6 December 2011, the administrative separation board convened.  The applicant appeared with counsel.  The board recommended the applicant be discharged with issuance of a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.
       
       On 18 January 2012, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

       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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issue 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 his service below that meriting a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 

           The applicant contends the administrative separation board as outlined by military legal counsel was illegal.  The evidence of record (Legal Review of Administrative Separation Board Proceedings) dated 14 December 2011, indicated the board proceedings were legally sufficient in the following particulars:  The findings of the Board pertaining to the misconduct were supported by a preponderance of the evidence, there were no material errors present affecting the findings and recommendations, the defense counsel’s issues raised in the rebuttal are insufficient to warrant a general, under honorable conditions discharge and the actions taken by the Board during this proceeding comply with the legal and procedural requirements of AR 635-200.

            Also, 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.  

           The applicant further contends he served with complete honor and integrity for more than a decade, service that had made him the man he is and also received the Purple Heart and Bronze Star Medal with Valor.  The analyst acknowledges the applicant’s in-service accomplishments and considered the quality of his service during the initial portion of the period of service under review.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the repeated incidents of misconduct, the multiple negative counseling statements, and the documented actions under Article 15 of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

            The applicant additionally contends that during the separation board proceedings half truths were presented to the board by the military side as fact and any facts about the shown truth were omitted.  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 contention.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that the evidence was not factual.
 
            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: 12 September 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Online application, dated (120320);  Memorandum, Request for Reconsideration of WTB Separation Board Recommendation, three (3) pages, dated (111212); DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), two (2) pages, dated (031228); Bronze Star Medal (Valor) Narrative; Purple Heart Certificate, dated (040413); Certifcate of Commendation, dated (030125); City Resolution, City of Chicago, two (2), dated (041208); Certificate of Congratulation, State of Illnois, undated; and two DD Forms 214, dated (060702, 120131).  

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: None

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 AR20120006644
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 3 of 4 pages