IN THE CASE OF:  

      BOARD DATE:  	3 April 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120021088
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.




      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge characterization from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was not afforded proper counsel and did not understand the consequences as explained or not explained during the discharge process.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		9 November 2012
b. Discharge Received:		General, under honorable conditions 
c. Date of Discharge:			1 March 2011
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, Chapter 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			Co B, 3d MI Battalion, Camp Humphreys, Korea
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	13 January 2009, 6 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 1 months, 19 days
h. Total Service:			4 years, 8 months, 10 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA 060622-090112/HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist
m. GT Score:				85
n. Education:				High School Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Korea, SWA
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (080902-090827)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR 						OSR-2
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes	
u. Prior Board Review:			No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 June 2006.  On 13 January 2009, he reenlisted for a period of 6 years; he was 20 years old at the time.   The record shows he served a combat tour in Iraq and earned several awards that included an ARCOM and an AAM.  At the time his discharge proceeding were initiated he was serving at Camp Humphreys, Korea.  He served a little more than 2 years, 1 month, 19 days of a 6 year reenlistment period.



SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  On 10 January 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to process him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of pattern of misconduct; specifically for:

      a.  on divers occasions failing to follow lawful written orders, 
      b.  being derelict in the performance of his duties, 
      c.  failing to report to his designated place of duty.  

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and informed the applicant of his rights.

3.  On 10 January 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement on his own behalf in which he acknowledged his mistakes and requested to be retained in the Army.  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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 3 February 2011, the separation authority, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  The applicant was separated on 1 March 2011, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b (Pattern of Misconduct), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, a SPD code of JKA and a RE code of 3.

6.  The applicant’s record does not show any time lost.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  The applicant's disciplinary record includes his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, as follows:

      a.  On 15 January 2010, for wrongfully leaving the 50-mile radius (100101), failure to obey a lawful general order by breaking curfew (081204).  His punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and restriction (FG)
      
      b.  On 1 March 2010, for failure to obey a lawful order (100214), and breaking curfew (100214).  His punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-3, a suspended forfeiture of $961.00 per month for two months, 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG)
      
	c.  On 11 August 2010, for failure to obey a lawful order (100811) by having a member of the opposite sex in his room.  His punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and restriction (Summarized)

2.  There are 8 negative counseling statements dated between 2 January 2010 and 15 December 2010 for breaking restriction, revocation of pass privileges, losing his room key, failing to report, playing music too loud, violating the barracks SOP, breaking curfew, and initiation of separation action.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

None provided with the application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided with the application.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY

1.  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 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 being absent 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.  

2.  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.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

3.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining his military records and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The record confirms 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.  It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  By the repeated incidents of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s service was marred by three Articles 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and numerous negative counseling statements.

3.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  

4.  The applicant contends that he was not afforded proper counsel and did not understand the consequences of his discharge.  However, the record shows that on 10 January 2011, the applicant consulted with CPT B, a Trial Defense Counselor, the applicant provided a statement on his behalf and was informed as to the reason for his discharge proceedings and consequences of his actions.  Prior to initiating the discharge proceedings, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about the deficiencies which could lead to his separation.  The evidence of record established the applicant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome these noted deficiencies.  As the applicant did not subsequently conform to required standards of discipline and performance, the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service.

5.  The record contains no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the applicant’s command, all requirements of law and regulation were met, and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

6.  Records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.

7.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. 



SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review    Date: 3 April 2013    Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA

Board Vote:
Character  	Change:  0  	No Change:  5
Reason	Change:  0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:	No
Change Characterization to: NA	
Change Reason to:	NA
Change RE Code to: NA	
Grade Restoration to: NA	
Change Authority for Separation:	NA




















 
Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTH - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR 20120021088

6



ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1