IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	4 September 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130002170
___________________________________________________________________________

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 was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.

2.  Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board noted certain administrative errors on the applicant's DD Form 214 and directed the following changes as approved by the separation authority:

a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, 
b. block 26, separation code changed to JKQ, 




      
      
      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 to upgrade his characterization of service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable, and to change the narrative reason for his discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he is requesting a review of his DD Form 214 to correct the inconsistencies he had not noticed until he was applying for VA benefits.  He noticed he had less than an honorable discharge and the narrative reason for separation was misconduct.  He knows of no reason why he was separated early due to misconduct and he was not given an honorable discharge.  It appears to him that misconduct would not have warranted a general, under honorable conditions discharge, but something worse.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	28 January 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	24 January 2004 
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(1), 
			JKD, RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	HHC, 1st Bn, 4th ADA, 1st AD, Baghdad, Iraq
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	10 July 2000, 4 years
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	3 years, 6 months, 15 days
	h.	Total Service:	3 years, 6 months, 15 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None 
	j.	Previous Discharges:	None 
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-3 
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	14S00, Avenger Crewmember
	m.	GT Score:	97
	n.	Education:	GED
	o.	Overseas Service:	Germany, SWA
	p.	Combat Service:	Iraq (030429-031018)
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	NDSM; ASR; OSR-2
	r.	Administrative Separation Board: 	No
	s.	Performance Ratings:	None
	t.	Counseling Statements:	NIF
	u.	Prior Board Review:	No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:  

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 July 2000, for a period of 3 years and extended his enlistment on 25 October 2001, for an additional year.  He was 17 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED).  He served in Germany and Iraq.  His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  He completed 3 years, 6 months, and 15 days of active duty service.


SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 2 October 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason misconduct-commission of a serious offense, for being disrespectful toward a commissioned officer and a noncommissioned officer.

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 6 October 2003, 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 13 October 2003, 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 discharged from the Army on 24 January 2004, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(1), AR 635-200, for misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKD and an RE code of 3. 

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Article 15, dated 2 August 2003, being disrespectful in language toward a commissioned officer (030727.  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $532 per month for two months, 14 days of extra duty, (CG). 

2.  The commander’s forwarding memorandum, dated 2 October 2003, indicates a company grade Article 15, dated 26 August 2002, for disrespecting an NCO.

3.  There is no counseling statement available in the record.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided no further evidence.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant provided none.  

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.

4.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  It identifies the SPD code of "JKD" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(1), misconduct (AWOL or Desertion).  It further defines the SPD code of "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, misconduct (Serious Offense).  

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge and a change to the narrative reason for his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  However, upon reviewing the applicant’s request to change the narrative reason for his discharge, it revealed an administrative error in his DD Form 214. 

2.  The service record reflects that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, separation authority as AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(1), and block 26 separation code  as "JKD." 
3.  Accordingly, as approved by the separation authority, the following administrative corrections are recommended:

      a. block 25, separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c
      b. block 26, separation code to JKQ

4.  Except for the modifications as stated, above the discharge was both proper and equitable.

5.  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 incidents of serious 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 an Article 15 for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

6.  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.  

7.  The applicant contends he was unaware of his general, under honorable conditions discharge for misconduct, until he was applying for VA benefits, and he saw no reason not to receive an honorable discharge.  However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he may have been unjustly discriminated.  In fact, the applicant’s Article 15 punishment justifies an incident of serious misconduct.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge.  Moreover, the record of evidence shows that when the applicant was informed of the reason for his discharge proceedings, advised of his rights, and afforded the opportunity to consult with a legal counsel, his response indicated understanding the impact of the discharge action and making an election of rights upon consulting with a legal counsel.  Further, the DD Form 214 shows his authentication at the time it was issued.  Both processes indicate he was fully aware of the reason for his discharge process.  

8.  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 separation process.   The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service record.  Accordingly, the 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:  4 September 2013      Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  1	No Change:  4
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 Authority for Separation:	AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Other:  				Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code JKQ

















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)		AR20130002170



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1