IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	10 April 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120021519
___________________________________________________________________________

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 the characterization of his service from general, under honorable conditions to honorable and the narrative reason for his separation be changed from misconduct to disability.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was due to an injury he sustained during an airborne jump while on active duty. Prior to his injury, he was consistently identified and commended by his leaders as a high performing Soldier during APFTs and was also the guidon carrier for his unit.  The injury reduced his physical performance and affected the overall perception of him.  He was removed from his duty as the guidon bearer and the unit’s Ranger School preparation class.  He was perceived as a substandard infantry Soldier.  After his discharge, he continued to have difficulties with the injuries.  The VA hospital determined his injuries to be service-connected disability and that they would continue to treat the injuries.  The injuries have limited his ability to make a living as an electrical engineer.  He is unable to maintain the physical activities that he performed prior to the injuries.  It has also affected other parts of his body (i.e., knee injury).
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	19 November 2012
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, under honorable conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	20 September 1999
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct / AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, JKA
			RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	B Company, 509th Infantry (Airborne), JRTC
			(Operations Group), Fort Polk, LA
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	14 October 1997 / 3 years
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 11 months, 7 days
	h.	Total Service:	1 year, 11 months, 7 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	None
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-3
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	11B (Infantryman)
	m.	GT Score:	NIF
	n.	Education:	GED
	o.	Overseas Service:	None
	p.	Combat Service:	None
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	ASR
	r.	Administrative Separation Board: 	No
	s.	Performance Ratings:	None
	t.	Counseling Statements:	Yes
	u.	Prior Board Review:	No



SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 October 1997 for a period of 3 years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and completed education through a GED.  There is no record of any overseas assignment or having received any awards.  He has completed 1 year, 11 months, and 7 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 5 August 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200.  Specifically for the following offenses:  

	a.	failing to maintain a healthy living condition in his barracks room (21 May 1998)
	b.	losing his military ID card x 4 (17 June 1998, 10 September 1998, 2 November 1998, 11 January 1999)
	c.	failing to report to his appointed place of duty x 5 (18 June 1998, 23 November 1998, 11 March 1999, 13 March 1999, 26 May 1999)
	d.	failing to return a rented video to AAFES and owing a late fee of $86.60 (21 August 1998)
	e.	disobeying a lawful order from a superior noncommissioned officer (26 January 1999)
	f.	writing a check with nonsufficient funds (15 March 1999)
	g.	having a check returned for nonsufficient funds (29 March 1999)
	h.	writing two checks on a closed checking account (6 June 1999)
	i.	receiving a Company Grade Article 15 for failing to be at his appointed place of duty, disobeying a superior noncommissioned officer, failing to pay a debt, and writing a check with insufficient funds on 17 separate occasions (2 August 1999)
2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 12 August 1999, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and submitted a statement on 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  In an undated memorandum, 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 discharged from the Army on 20 September 1999, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and a RE code of 3. 

6.  The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Article 15, dated 2 August 1999, for failing to go to appointed place of duty at the prescribed time (23 November 1998); making and uttering certain checks with insufficient funds x 17 between (25 May 1998 and 27 December 1998); disobeying an NCO (990126); failing to pay debt (990126), reduced to E-2, forfeiture of $25, extra duty for 14 days (CG);
      
2.  Twenty-four negative counseling statements dated between 17 June 1998 and 26 May 1999, for showing up to work late, missing formations, disobeying orders, maintaining an unhealthy living conditions in barracks, unsafe vehicle, losing ID cards, indebtedness, writing checks with insufficient funds, failing to return video to the exchange, and improper uniform;
      
3.  A warrant for arrest by civil authorities for issuing checks on a closed account, 5 June 1999; 

4.  An MP Report dated 30 June 1999, that indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for theft by checks. 

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided DD Form 293, dated 15 November 2012; DD Form 214 for service under current review; VA summary medical message, dated 13 November 2012.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant provided none. 

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 service and a change to the narrative reason for his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge or a change to the reason for his 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 pattern of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  

3.  The applicant contends that he had good service.  The applicant’s service accomplishments he outlined in his application, the quality of his service, and the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  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 action under an Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

4.  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.  

5.  The applicant contends his medical issues contributed to his discharge.  However, the fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing.  The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels.  
6.  Additionally, the applicant requests a change in the reason for his discharge.  However, Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  It identifies the SPD code of "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, for pattern of misconduct.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  

7.  Furthermore, a review of the service record does not reveal any evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the applicant’s command.  It appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  In essence, the records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

8.  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: 10 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: No Change	
Change Reason to:	No Change
Change Authority for Separation: NA
Change RE Code to: No Change	
Grade Restoration to: NA	
Other: 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	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions



ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20120021519



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1