IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	23 August 2013	

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130004365
___________________________________________________________________________

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 his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to  honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he is requesting an honorable DD Form 214 covering the period 27 May 2005 through 26 May 2008.  All of his active duty was lumped together and he never received proper credit for his good years of honorable service.   

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			26 February 2013	
b. Discharge Received:			Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				11 October 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200
      14-12c, JKQ, RE-3	
e. Unit of assignment:				Headquarters, Public Health Command 								District-Japan, Unit 45005, APO AP 96343-							5005.	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		27 January 2012, Extension; 11 months
g. Current Enlistment Service:		0 years, 8 months, 14 days
h. Total Service:				7 years, 4 months, 16 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			RA (050526-080616), HD										RA (080617-120126), Extension
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		68R10, Veterinary Food Inspection Specialist
m. GT Score:					108
n. Education:					HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				Japan (090607-121011)
p. Combat Service:				None
q. Decorations/Awards:			AAM-3, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, NPDR 							OSR, ASUA
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		Yes
s. Performance Ratings:			None
t. Counseling Statements:			Yes
u. Prior Board Review:				No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:	
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 May 2005 for a period of 4 years.  He was 
21 years old at the time and was a high school graduate.  He reenlisted 18 June 2008; however, the enlistment contract is not in file.  When his discharge proceedings were initiated he was serving in Japan.  He earned several awards including three AAMs, two AGCMs, and completed a NPDR.   

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 11 July 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, specifically for the commission of the following serious offenses:

	a.  for unlawfully striking his daughter on the forearm with a belt, which Family Advocacy and CID was notified by the Summer camp teachers (110728)

	b.  for unlawfully striking his daughter with a belt (120305)

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

3.  On 24 July 2012, the applicant 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 honorable 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 of the separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 11 September 2012, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights.  

5.  On 26 September 2012, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel.  The board recommended the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

6.  On 1 October 2012, the separation authority approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

7.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 11 October 2012, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions discharge under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and an RE code of 3. 

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  On 30 September 2009, a letter of concern, as the result of an Iwakuni Marine Corps Air Station Criminal Investigation Division (CID).  CID found that the applicant’s daughter was bruised from being struck and directed specific actions to improve his parenting skills.
2.  Field Grade Article 15 on 2 December 2011.  The applicant was found guilty of unlawfully striking his daughter and sentenced to reduction to the pay grade of E-3 (suspended), extra duty for 7 days, restriction for 14 days, and an oral reprimand.

3.  Field Grade Article 15 on 26 April 2012.  The applicant was found guilty of unlawfully striking his daughter and sentenced to a reduction to the pay grade of E-2.

4.  U.S. Naval Criminal Investigative Service Report, dated 5 March 2012.  The report  indicated the applicant was the subject of an investigation for child abuse.  

5.  Counseling for being recommended for separation from service due to two incidents which  resulted in Article 15 action and event oriented counseling.

6.  The Administrative Board proceedings and findings, dated 26 September 2012.  

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: 

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, an honorable discharge certificate, two AGCMs, a COA, two certificates of promotion, and a DD Form 214.  

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 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.  The applicant's serious incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline.  His misconduct clearly diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a general or an honorable discharge. 

3.  The applicant is requesting a DD Form 214 to reflect his period of good service from 
27 May 2005 through 26 May 2008.  All of his active duty was lumped together and he never received proper credit for his good years and honorable service.  However, the applicant’s request to receive a DD Form 214 for the stated period of service does not fall within the purview of this Board.  The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter.  A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. 

4.  Further, a review of the applicant’s period of service, accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the repeated incidents of misconduct or by the multiple negative counseling statements and the documented actions under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

5.  Lastly, 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.  

6.  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:  Record Review 	Date: 23 August 2013	Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel: 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:		No Change
Change RE Code to:			No Change
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)		AR20130004365



Page 2 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1