IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	12 April 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120022910
___________________________________________________________________________

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 from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, prior to his discharge he was having problems with his back and with an upgrade of his discharge he would be able to receive VA benefits.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		10 December 2012		
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions		
c. Date of Discharge:			24 April 2000	
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	 Misconduct, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ
						RE-3	
e. Unit of assignment: 			A Btry, 1/5th FA Bn, Fort Riley, KS	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	30 January 1998, for 4 years		
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 1 month, 24 days	
h. Total Service:			2 years, 1 month, 24 days	
i. Time Lost:				31 days
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	13B10/Cannon Crewmember
m. GT Score:				104
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			None 
q. Decorations/Awards:		ASR. OSR
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 30 January 1998, for a period of four years.  He was 19 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He served for 2 years,         1 month and 24 days and was discharged for misconduct, specifically for driving while drunk, AWOL, and failure to report.  His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  




SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 3 April 2000, 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 misconduct (serious offense).  Specifically for the following offenses:

a. receiving a Summary Court-Martial 10 March 2000 for driving while drunk and going AWOL 
b. receiving a company grade Article 15 on 23 November 1999 for failure to report

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

3.  On 3 April 2000, the applicant waived his right to consult 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 5 April 2000, 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 24 April 2000, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and an RE code of 3. 

6.  The applicant's record shows he was confined by civilian authority for 1 day during the period 18 October 1999 to 19 October 1999, AWOL for five days during the period 4 March 2000 to 8 March 2000, when he was apprehended; and military confinement for 26 days during the period 8 March 2000 to 3 April 2000, as the result of punishment received from his Summary Court-Martial.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Article 15, dated 23 November 1999, failure to go to at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 7 October 1999.  The punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $251.00 pay per month for one month, extra duty for 7 days, and restriction for 7 days (CG).

2.  Summary Court-Martial, dated 10 March 2000, for going AWOL from 4 March 2000 to 8 March 2000 and driving while drunk on 8 March 2000.  The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $670.00 per for one month, and confinement for 29 days.

3.  A General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 17 March 2000, for driving under the influence of alcohol on 8 March 2000.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided no additionally documents with his application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided by the applicant.

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 the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the document 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 the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by a Summary Court-Martial and an Article 15 for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

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 contends that prior to his discharge he was having problems with his back and with an upgrade of his discharge he would be able to receive VA benefits.  However, the service record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication.  

5.  Furthermore, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.

6.  The 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: 12 April 2013        Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

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)		AR20120022910



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1