IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	7 August 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130005098
___________________________________________________________________________

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 to upgrade his characterization of service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 28 months of service with no other adverse action.  The applicant makes reference to his extensive self-authored statement for further details surrounding the circumstances of his discharge. 
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	11 March 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	30 June 2011
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-
			12b, JKA, RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	Rear Detachment, 030004ARSQ, Schofield 
			Barracks, HI
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	10 January 2009, 4 years
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 5 months, 21 days
	h.	Total Service:	8 years, 3 months, 6 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	USAR     (030325-030731) / NA
			ADT        (030801-040127) / HD
			USAR     (040128-050417) / NA
			AD MOB (050418-060616) / HD
			USAR     (060617-070221) / NA
			RA          (070222-090109) / HD
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-4
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	63B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic
	m.	GT Score:	NIF
	n.	Education:	HS Graduate
	o.	Overseas Service:	SWA
	p.	Combat Service:	Iraq (050610-060510); (090101-091115)
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	ARCOM; AGCM; NDSM; ICM-2CS; GWOTSM 
			AFRM-M Device; ASR: OSR-2; CAB
	r.	Administrative Separation Board: 	NIF
	s.	Performance Ratings:	None
	t.	Counseling Statements:	NIF
	u.	Prior Board Review:	No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:  	

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 February 2007 and reenlisted on 10 January 2009, for a period of 4 years.  He was 22 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He served in Iraq.  He earned an ARCOM.  He completed a total of 8 years, 3 months, and 6 days of reserve and active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s service record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s digital signature.  

2.  The DD Form 214 indicates that on 30 June 2011, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for pattern of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKA and a reentry (RE) code of 3.  

3.  The applicant’s available record does not show any recorded actions under the UCMJ, unauthorized absences or time lost.  However, he was separated as a PFC/E-3 with an effective date of pay grade as 1 November 2009, and the action that caused his reduction is not contained in the service record.

4.  On 16 June 2011, HQDA, U.S. Army Garrison-Hawaii, Schofield Barracks, HI, Orders Number 167-0005, amended by Orders number 181-0007, discharged the applicant from the Army effective 30 June 2011.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

There is no further evidence in the applicant’s record.  

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided 3 character reference letters, dated 8 July 2012 and 15 April 2011; applicant’s letter to a senator, undated, regarding misconduct among noncommissioned officers; memorandum, dated 21 April 2006, subject: Statement of Service; Orders awarding CAB, dated 25 March 2006; memorandum, dated 10 April 2006, subject: Overseas Service Ribbon; memorandum, dated 20 April 2006, subject: Army Good Conduct Medal; memorandum, dated 30 January 2006, subject: Wartime service for Iraqi Campaign Medal; memorandum, dated 20 April 2006, subject: The Armed Forces Reserve Medal with “M” Device; DA Form 638, Recommendation for Award, dated 1 February 2006; 13 September-17 September 2010 certificate of training; 31 March-4 April 2008 certificate of training; memorandum, dated 27 March 2006, subject: Statement of Service; certificate of recognition; award of combat patch certificate, dated 1 December 2008; Army motor vehicle operator’s permit; DD Form 214, dated 16 June 2006; DD Form 214, dated 27 January 2004; certificate of completing training, dated 16 December 2010; certificate of completing training, dated 10 December 2007; DA Form 4187, dated 22 May 2005, showing promotion to corporal; DA Form 4187, dated 24 March 2006, requesting award of CAB. 

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.

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

2.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was digitally authenticated by the applicant's signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process.  

3.  The DD Form 214 also indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of pattern of misconduct with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

4.  The applicant contends the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire Army career.  Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  Moreover, the single incident of misconduct leading to his discharge adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.

5.  The applicant also references medical issues that may have contributed to his discharge from the Army.  However, the service record does not support the applicant’s medical issues, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge may have been the result of any medical condition.  Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication.  

6.  The applicant's contentions about his service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to any incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceedings were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service for the specific service under current review.  Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  There is no evidence in the record and the applicant has produced insufficient evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains insufficient evidence in support of his request for an upgrade of the discharge.  

7.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet and medical issues/treatments) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record.

8.  Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief.





SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: 	Records Review	Date:   7 August 2013       Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel:  None

Board Vote:
Character Change:  2	No Change:  3
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)		AR20130005098



Page 2 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1