IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	28 June 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130000158
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

1.  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 to be both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  

2.  However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant’s discharge, the Board found that the applicant’s DD Form 214, block 27 contains the erroneous reentry code of 4.    

3.  In view of the error, the Board directed an administrative correction to block 27 to read RE-3, as required by Army Regulations.  





      
      
      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 his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he knew at the time of the offense the female he texted was almost 18.  However, he didn’t know how serious the offense would become.  He was respected by his commanding officers and considered to be a stand-up Soldier.  His work ethic was exceptional and he was extremely professional.  He was getting ready to go to the E-5 board when the incident occurred.  He now realizes the mistake he made; however, he was a kid back then and did things without thinking about the ramifications.  He is more mature now and thinks before he reacts.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		20 December 2012
b. Discharge Received:		Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 
c. Date of Discharge:			15 March 2012
d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, 14-12c 							JKQ, RE-3
e.	Unit of assignment:			HHC, 555th Engineer Brigade, Joint Base Lewis-							McChord, WA
f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	1 October 2008, 5 years
g.	Current Enlistment Service:	3 year, 5 months, 14 days
h.	Total Service:			4 years, 9 months, 26 days
i.	Time Lost:				Yes
j.	Previous Discharges:		RA (070426-080930), HD 
k.	Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4	
l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	12B10, Combat Engineer
m. 	GT Score:				97
n. 	Education:				GED
o. 	Overseas Service:			SWA
p. 	Combat Service:			Iraq (081024-091007)
q. 	Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-w/CS-2 								GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR, OSR, CAB
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 26 April 2007, for a period of 3 years and 19 weeks.  On 1 October 2008, he reenlisted for a period of 5 years.  He was 20 years old at the time of his reenlistment.  He was serving at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA, when his discharge was initiated.  His record indicates he was awarded the ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, and a CAB.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The service record indicates that the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct-commission of a serious offense, specifically for enticing and inducing a minor to produce nude pictures and transferring them through the internet and cellular telephone system (101001-101104).

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an under other than honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.  

3.  On 29 December 2011, the applicant with a Special Court-Martial pending and charges preferred against him, consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, entered into a pre-trial offer to plead guilty and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board as it related to an administrative separation initiated and/or approved with a characterization of service or description of separation of other than honorable. 

4.  On 6 February 2012, the applicant again consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and indicated he would not submit a statement on his 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

5.  On 8 March 2012, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  

6.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 15 March 2012, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions discharge for misconduct (Serious Offense), under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, with a SPD Code of JKQ, and RE code of 3.

7.  The applicant’s record contains a period of unauthorized absence or time lost (120109-120202) for a total of 25 days (military confinement).  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  A Field Grade Article 15 dated 25 April 2011, with intent to deceive, made a false official statement to two special agents that a Soldier had desecrated a corpse in Iraq (101103).  His punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $733.00 pay per month for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days.  

2.  A Summary Court-Martial (SCM), dated 9 January 2012, for two specifications of Article 134 (solicitation of a minor between 1 October 2010 and 4 November 2010, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2251 and obstruction of justice between 1 October 2010 and 4 November 2010).  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $300.00 pay and confinement for 30 days. 

3. One negative counseling, dated between 8 March 2011, for making a false statement in reference to a Soldier desecrating a dead body.  

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

None provided with the application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant contends he is going to school.

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 service record 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 commission of a serious offense, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a general or a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by an Article 15 and a SCM.

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 he was young and immature at the time of the incident.  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.

5.  The applicant contends he was respected by his commanding officers, considered to be a stand-up Soldier, good work ethic, extremely professional, and was getting ready to go to the E-5 board.  The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to 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. 

6.  However, the service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, reentry code as 4.  The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the discharge by reason of misconduct (serious offense).  AR 635-5-1, (Separation Program Designator Codes) and Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier processed for misconduct (serious offense) will be assigned a SPD Code of JKQ and a RE Code of 3.  

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:     28 June 2013	Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel:  None



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:			Yes
Change Characterization to:		No Change
Change Reason to:				No Change
Change RE Code to:			3
Grade Restoration to:			NA
Change Authority for Separation:		No Change
Other:						No




























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)		AR20130000158



Page 5 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1