IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	31 May 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130002044
___________________________________________________________________________

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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he is asking for a review because when he was enlisted he was young and just trying to get away from home.   He knows he was wrong for a lot of things he did in his past while he was enlisted and has grown to understand that.  He has matured as an individual and has new priorities to consider and new responsibilities to take care of.  He should not have done the things he did or make some of the choices he made because it affected his future and career as a Soldier. But since he has been out he has had time to reflect and think about some of his choices. He now has a family and wants to give them a better future and knows that he can provide them with that by reenlisting into the Army.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		22 January 2013		
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			6 March 2008	
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, 							JKA, RE-3	
e. Unit of assignment:			110th Military Police Company, 759th Military Police 						Battalion, Fort Carson, CO			
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	15 February 2007, 5 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 0 months, 22 days
h. Total Service:			1 year, 0 months, 22 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	31B10, Military Police
m. GT Score:				NIF
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 15 February 2007, for a period of 5 years.  He was 20 years old at the time of entry, a high school graduate, and had completed 1 year and       22 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 11 February 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, Pattern of Misconduct. Specifically for:

      a.  failing to report to his appointed place of duty (071013); 
      b.  making a false official statement to his commander (071014);
      c.  being charged with housebreaking, communicating a threat, and conduct 			     unbecoming (071016);
      d.  failing to obey an order to switch rooms with another Soldier (070914);
      e.  making a false statement to a senior NCO concerning another senior                   		     NCO (070917);
      f.   receiving a Company Grade Article 15 (071127) for stealing and using his 		  	     roommate’s credit card;
      g.  being arrested on a local warrant for failing to appear in court for a traffic violation 	  	     (070925).

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

3.  On 12 February 2008, the applicant consulted 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 21 February 2008, the separation authority approved and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  The applicant was separated on 6 March 2008, 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:

1.  Article 15, dated 27 November 2007, stealing a credit card, of a value of $107.41, the property of LJS (070908).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $303.00 pay per month for one month, 14 days of extra duty and restriction (CG). 

2.  An initial counseling statement, dated 13 August 2007; and two negative counseling statements dated between 18 September 2007 and16 October 2007, for failing to obey a lawful order, failing to report for duty and events that came to light between 13 October 2007 and 16 October 2007.
      
3.  An MP Report, dated 16 October 2007, that indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for making threats, being involved in several altercations, and housebreaking. 

4.  A County Sheriff’s Booking Report, #0700020022, dated 23 October 2007, that indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for identity theft.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an on-line application and a DD Form 214.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were 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 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 negative counseling statements and an Article 15 for 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 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.

5.  Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on AR 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code.  An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 

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:  31 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 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)		AR20130002044

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1