IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr.

      BOARD DATE:  	29 May 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130001316
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, his testimony 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 discharge from under other than honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was going through a seriously ugly divorce and it reflected on his performance while on active duty.  Had it been under other circumstances the counseling statements would not have occurred.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

      a.  Application Receipt Date:		18 January 2013
      b.  Discharge Received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
      c.  Date of Discharge:			26 December 2012
      d.  Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, Chapter 14, paragraph 								14-12b,  JKA, RE-3
      e.  Unit of assignment:			B Co, 1-1 Attk Recon Bn, CAB, 1st Inf Div, Fort 							Riley, KS 
      f.  Current Enlistment Date/Term:		16 June 2009, 6 years and 0 weeks
      g.  Current Enlistment Service:		3 years, 6 months, 11 days
      h.  Total Service:				3 years, 6 months, 11 days
      i.  Time Lost:					None
      j.  Previous Discharges:			None
      k.  Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4	
      l.  Military Occupational Specialty:		15R10, Attack Helicopter Repairer
      m.  GT Score:				101
      n.  Education:				High School graduate
      o.  Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p.  Combat Service:				Iraq (100314-110225)
q.  Decorations/Awards:	AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, MUC 
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 16 June 2009 for a period of 6 years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He served in Ft. Riley KS, and Iraq.  He earned an AAM, an AGCM, and completed 3 years, 6 months, and 11 days of active duty service.




SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 25 September 2012, the commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, for a pattern of misconduct.  Specifically for:  
	a.  Failure to report to his appointed place of duty.
	b.  Failure to financially support his spouse.
	c.  Communicating threatening statements to other Soldiers.
	d.  Dereliction in the performance of his duties.  

2.  Based on the above pattern of misconduct, the commander recommended an under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 28 September 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted 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 with an under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 3 October 2012, the separation authority approved 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 26 December 2012, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKA, and an RE code of 3.  

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

The negative counseling statements dated between 24 May 2011 and 24 July 2012 for failure to report to his appointed place of duty, failure to financially support his spouse, communicating threatening statements to other Soldiers, and dereliction in the performance of his duties.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293 requesting an upgrade to his discharge, a copy of a DD Form 214, and two character reference references in his behalf.  

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were submitted 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 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 the pattern of misconduct, 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 multiple 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 he was going through a divorce that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged.  However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.  

5.  The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill.  However, 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: 29 May 2013           Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: 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:		No
Change Characterization to:	No Change
Change Reason to:			No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
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)		AR20130001316

Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1