IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	10 May 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130001360
___________________________________________________________________________

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 characterization from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was unfairly discharged because he was going through a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and was told the Chapter 14 process would be much quicker.  He had difficulties with his supervisor and was confined to the barracks and reprimanded.  He believes he is deserving of an honorable discharge.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		18 January 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions 
c. Date of Discharge:			1 June 2006
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, Chapter 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			B Co, 2d Bn, 75th IN Regiment, Fort Lewis, WA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	28 October 2003, 3 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 7 months, 4 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 7 months, 4 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	11B1P, Infantry
m. GT Score:				98
n. Education:				HS graduate
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			Afghanistan (040630-041010)
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM-2, ACM, GWOTSM, ASR, CIB, Parachutist 						Badge
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes	
u. Prior Board Review:			No 
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 October 2003, for a period of 3 years.  He was 18 years old at the time and a high school graduate.  When his discharge proceedings were initiated he was serving at Fort Lewis.  He served for 2 years, 7 months and 4 days on active duty which included a combat tour.  His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  


SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 6 October 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to process him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of pattern of misconduct; specifically for repeated incidents of disrespect and insubordination towards his immediate leaders and for an incident of sexual harassment.
      
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 19 October 2005, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, indicated he would submit a statement on his behalf (NIF).  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  

4.  On 19 January 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  On 14 February 2006, the battalion commander requested the applicant’s discharge orders be rescinded because of a pending CID investigation.  

6.  On an undated memorandum, the separation authority requested reinstatement of the separation procedures.  The applicant was no longer under a CID investigation nor pending an MOS Medical Retention Board (MMRB).

7.  The applicant was separated on 1 June 2006, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 
14-12b (Pattern of Misconduct), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKA and an RE code of 3.

8.  The applicant’s record does not show any time lost.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  A company grade Article 15 issued on 30 June 2005, for providing a false statement (050617), by impersonating his father and falsely making a Red Cross distress message.  His punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and restriction.

2.  A company grade Article 15 issued on 28 February 2006, for dereliction of duty (060223), by failing to notify his chain of command about another Soldier’s possession of an illegal weapon.  His punishment consisted of a suspended reduction to the grade of E-3, forfeiture of pay in the amount of $374.00, extra duty and restriction for a period of 14 days.

3.  There are 2 negative counseling statements dated 27 June 2005 and 1 August 2005, for lying to superiors, lack of motivation, sexual harassment, and for being disrespectful.


EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: 

None provided with the application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided with the application.

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

2.  The applicant contends that he was unfairly discharged.  However, 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 misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s service was marred by two Article 15s for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and two negative counseling statements.

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 contends he should have been medically discharged because he was going through an MEB process; however, Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct.  A document in the record indicates the applicant was no longer pending an MOS Medical Retention Board (MMRB) when his discharge was ordered to be executed.  

5.  Further, 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 court-martial process.  The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service record.  

6.  Records show the proper discharge 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:  10 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 RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Change Authority for Separation:	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	UOTH - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR 20130001360

Page 6 of 6 pages




ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1