IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr.

      BOARD DATE:  	17 April 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130000295
___________________________________________________________________________

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, that he made bad choices due to being young and naïve, and was not treated fairly by his chain of command.  After receiving an Article 15 for not being at his appointed place of duty, he found it hard to overcome the stigma of being a bad Soldier and felt his chain of command did not recognize he had been rehabilitated.  He acknowledges not returning on-time from a 3 day pass which resulted in a second Article 15 and being separated from the Army.  He highlights that since his discharge in 2006, he has reenlisted in the ARNG, achieved the rank of SGT, graduated from Ranger School and the US Army Sniper course, and received numerous military achievement awards.  An upgrade would allow him to further his civilian career and use the GI Bill.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		17 December 2012
b. Discharge received:			General, under honorable conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			22 August 2006
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (AWOL), AR 635-200, 14-12c(1), 							JKD, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:	 		C Troop, 1st Battalion, 4th Cavalry Regiment, Fort 						Riley, Kansas		
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:  	13 July 2005, 5 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:  	01 year, 00 months, 12 days
h. Total Service:			01 year, 00 months, 12 days
i. Time Lost:				28 days (060118-060125 and 060616-060705) 
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	11B10, Infantryman
m. GT Score:				119
n. Education:				HS Graduate
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:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 July 2005, for 5 years.  He was 18 years old at the time and a high school graduate.  The applicant served a year and 12 days.  At the time his discharge proceeding were initiated, he was serving at Fort Riley, KS.  
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  On 26 July 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to process him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(1), by reason of misconduct; specifically for receiving a Field Grade Article 15 and pending an Article 15 for  being AWOL twice (060118-060125 and 060615-060705).

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 1 August 2006, the applicant was afforded the opportunity to consult with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  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 22 August 2006, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(1), for misconduct (AWOL), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKD and an RE code of 3.

6.  The applicant’s record contains two periods of lost time for being AWOL for a total of 28 days.  

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:

     a.  On 8 February 2006, received a Field Grade Article 15 for being AWOL 
(060118-060125 ).  His punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of pay in the amount of $713.00 for two months, suspended, 45 days of extra duty, and 45 days of restriction.

     b.  On 5 June 2006, received a Summarized Article 15 for disobeying a lawful order from the post commander by wrongfully exceeding the 250 mile radius without submitting a pass request (060513).  His punishment consisted of 14 days extra duty and 14 days restriction.  

2.  Two negative counseling statements that indicate the applicant was counseled for being AWOL twice.




EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

An online DD Form 293; a DD Form 214; an Enlisted Record Brief (ERB); an ARCOM with DA Form 638, dated 5 July 2012; two Arkansas Distinguish Service Medals; three AAMs with DA Form 638s, dated 21 June 2011, 11 March 2012, and 13 March 2012; a Certificate of Appreciation, dated 15 March 2012; a Combative Certificate of Training, dated 30 March 2012; a Combat Lifesaver Certificate of Training, dated 27 October 2011; three DA Form 1059s, Sniper’s Course/Marksmanship Schools; a Ranger Course Diploma, dated 21 January 2011; an Arkansas Senior Enlisted Leader’s award, dated 17 March 2012; Reconnaissance and Surveillance Leader’s Course, dated 5 May 2006; and a self-authored statement.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

Post Service Activity: The applicant states he is working as a police officer and is serving in the Arkansas ARNG.

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, the documents and issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  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 serious misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge.  His service was marred by two Article 15s.  

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 requests an upgrade of his characterization to honorable and contends that  after receiving an Article 15 for not being at his appointed place of duty, he found it hard to overcome the stigma of being a bad Soldier and felt his chain of command did not recognize he had been rehabilitated.  He acknowledges not returning on-time from a 3 day pass which resulted in a second Article 15 and being separated from the Army.  However, by regulation, a UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of misconduct.  It appears the applicant’s generally good record of service was the basis for his receiving a GD instead of the normal UOTHC discharge.  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. 

5.  The applicant contends that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge.  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.

6.  The applicant also contends that since leaving the Army, he is working as a police officer and is serving in the Arkansas ARNG.  He provided copies of numerous awards, certificates of training, and diplomas from various military schools.  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.  Further, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  

7.  The applicant has expressed his desire to further his civilian career and use the GI Bill.
However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Further, 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.

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

9.  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:  17 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 RE Code to:	N/A
Grade Restoration to:	N/A
Change Authority for Separation:	N/A
None:		N/A










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)		AR20130000295



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1