IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	1 May 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120022571
___________________________________________________________________________

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 to his characterization from general, under honorable conditions to honorable and a change to his RE code.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that it was his recruiter that provided a fraudulent high school transcript.  The applicant has now earned 40 college units which would enable him to enlist in the armed forces without a high school diploma.  While he was in the Army his service record was excellent.   It was never his intention to defraud the US Army in any way.  Since his separation, he has matured greatly and has served as a volunteer youth mentor in his local community and church.  Additionally, he has maintained his physical fitness by participating as a wild-land firefighter for CalFire and received letters of recommendation highlighting his outstanding work ethic and character.  The RE code of 3 on his DD Form 214 has precluded him from entering the armed forces. He is asking for another chance to be considered for enlistment, because he knows that he will be a great asset to the US Armed Forces.
   
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 		6 December 2012			
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			6 April 2006	
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Fraudulent Entry, AR 635-200, Chapter 7, Sec V 							JDA, RE-3	
e. Unit of assignment:			82nd Replacement Detachment, 82nd Division 							Special Troops Battalion, 82nd Airborne Division 						Fort Bragg, NC 			
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	19 July 2005, 4 years	
g. Current Enlistment Service:	8 months, 18 days
h. Total Service:			8 months, 18 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	11B1P, Infantryman
m. GT Score:				102	
n. Education:				Unknown
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		None
u. Prior Board Review:			No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 July 2005, for a period of 4 years.  He was      18 years old at the time of entry.  He completed 8 months, and 18 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 6 March 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 7, Section IV, paragraph 7-17, AR 635-200, for fraudulent entry, for entering a contract with the Army with false high school transcripts.  

2.  Based on the above, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 8 March, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and did not submit 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.  On 20 March 2006, the separation authority directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 6 April 2006, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 7, Section V, paragraph 7-17, AR 635-200, for fraudulent entry, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JDA, 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:

There are no counseling statements or UCMJ actions in the record.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

 The applicant provided a DD Form 293, ERB, community college transcript, fire crew firefighter certificate, letter of recommendation, order 082-0271, pre-separation counseling checklist, and a DD Form 214.     

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant has now earned 40 college units which would enable him to enlist in the armed forces without a high school diploma.  Since his separation, he has served as a volunteer youth mentor in his local community and church.  Additionally, he has maintained his physical fitness by participating as a wild-land firefighter for CalFire and received letters of recommendation highlighting his outstanding work ethic and character.  

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 7, paragraph 7-17 provides, in pertinent part, that a fraudulent entry is the procurement of an enlistment, reenlistment, or period of active service through any deliberate material misrepresentation, omission, or concealment of information which, if known and considered by the Army at the time of enlistment or reenlistment, might have resulted in rejection.  This includes all disqualifying information requiring a waiver.  A Soldier who concealed his or her conviction by civil court of a felonious offense normally will not be considered for retention.  

2.  Soldiers separated under Chapter 7 may be awarded an honorable discharge, general, under honorable conditions discharge, or a discharge under other than honorable conditions.  If in an entry level status, the discharge will be uncharacterized.  

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating 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 his act of omission on his enlistment contract, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  

3.  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.  

4.  The applicant’s DD 214 contains an error in block 25, separation authority.  Currently block 25 reads as follows:  AR 635-200, Chapter 7, Sec V and should read AR 635-200, Chapter 7, Sec IV.  Notwithstanding this error, it appears the discharge is proper and the rights of the applicant were not prejudiced by the error contained on the DD Form 214.  Department of Defense Directive 1332.28 stipulates that a discharge is proper unless the error was prejudicial in nature. 

5.  The applicant contends that it was his recruiter that provided a fraudulent high school transcript.  However, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.   The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service record.  

6.  The applicant contends that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge and has since matured.  The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

7.  The applicant’s post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and in the documents with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  

8.  The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings.  The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

9.  The applicant has requested a change to the reentry code (RE) in order to rejoin the Service.  However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on AR 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code.  An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 

10.  The records show the proper discharge procedures were followed in this case.  

11.  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:  Record Review 	  Date:  1 May 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:		No Change
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)		AR20120022571

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1