IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	5 June 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130002973
___________________________________________________________________________

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 to be 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 was a good Soldier and had every intent of moving up in the ranks, but made a mistake by driving under the influence.  After he left the Army, he went to school and graduated with an Associate’s degree and is now serving as a corrections officer and continues to serve in that capacity.  He feels he deserves an honorable characterization because he continues to contribute in the civilian world.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		7 January 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			8 June 2010
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, 14-12c, 						JKQ, RE-3        
e. Unit of assignment:			F Co, 26th Brigade Support Bn, FOB Warrior, Iraq
f. Enlistment Date/Term:		8 February 2008, 6 years 
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 4 months,1 days
h. Total Service:			8 years, 5 months, 0 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA (020109-080208), HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-5	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	92G10, Food Service Operations Specialist
m. GT Score:				89
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
   i.	Combat Service:			OIF Iraq x 4 (20021030-20030818); (20050119-
   						20060103); (20070509-20080810); (20091030-
   						20100525)
p. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AAM, AGCM-2, NDSM, ICM-3, GWOTSM, 						ASR, OSR-4, CAB, MUC, USAFPUC.
q. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
r. Performance Ratings:		Yes
s. Counseling Statements:		Yes	
t. Prior Board Review:			No


SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 January 2002.  On 8 February 2008, the applicant reenlisted for a period of 6 years, he was 24 years old at the time and a high school graduate.  When his discharge proceedings were initiated he was serving at FOB Warrior, Iraq.  The service record shows the applicant was awarded an ARCOM, AAM, two AGCMs, and a CAB.  He achieved the rank of Sergeant/E-5.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The record shows that on 26 March 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), specifically for

      a.  Attempting to have a prohibited relationship with a junior Soldier
      b.  Providing false statements
      c.  Wrongfully using provoking words.
      
2.  Based on the above misconduct the unit commander recommended an other than honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.  

3.  On 1 April 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and requested an administrative separation board.  On 12 May 2010, the applicant once again consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions and did not submit a statement on his behalf.  The battalion commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The brigade commander had initially recommended an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service, but later changed it to general, under honorable conditions.

4.  On 19 May 2010, the separation authority approved the conditional waiver request, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5.  The applicant was discharged on 8 June 2010, for misconduct (serious offense), under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, with an SPD code of JKQ and a 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.  A Field Grade Article 15 issued on 22 January 2010, for violation of a general regulation (090302-090901) by wrongfully attempting to have a prohibited relationship with a subordinate Soldier; with intent to deceive provided a false statement (090918); and used provoking words (090815-090826).  His punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-4, forfeiture of $1,146.00 per month for 2 months (suspended), and 30 days of extra duty.

2.  Two negative counseling statements dated 26 February 2010 and 30 March 2010, for failing to provide financial support to family members and notification of Chapter 14 separation action.

3.  Two NCOERs, dated 1 February 2009 through 22 January 2010 and 1 February 2008 through 31 January 2009.  The rater checked the block marginal in both reports and the senior rater awarded him a rating of 5/5 and 4/3 respectively.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

DD Form 214 and a college transcript.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant states that he is a corrections officer, has obtained an Associate’s Degree and continues to attend college in pursuit of a Bachelor of Science degree.

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 service record 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 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 his service below that meriting a general or a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s service was marred by a Field Grade 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 made a mistake by driving under the influence.  However, the applicant was discharged for attempting to have a prohibited relationship with a subordinate Soldier, lying about it and for using provoking words.  The discrediting entries constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of a non-commissioned officer in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by one or more incidents provides the basis for a characterization.  The applicant's several incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline.  These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. 

5.  Careful consideration was given to the applicant’s in-service accomplishments and the quality of his service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of the discharge.

6.  The applicant also contends that since leaving the Army he has attained a college degree, works as a corrections officer, is pursuing a BS degree, and continues to contribute to his community.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  

7.  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.  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:  5 June 2013	Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

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	UOTH - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR 20130002973

Page 6 of 6 pages



ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1