IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	4 September 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130005628
___________________________________________________________________________

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 discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he had a good record and his physical training (PT) was always good.  He contends his discharge was the result of a political situation.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		20 March 2013
b. Discharge received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			8 November 2006
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14						paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			108th MP Co, (ABN) (AA), 503d MP Bn, Fort Bragg 						NC
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	6 June 2002, 5 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	4 years, 5 months, 3 days
h. Total Service:			4 years, 5 months, 3 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l.  Military Occupational Specialty:	31B10, Military Police
m. GT Score:				112
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia 
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (030406-040405 and 050123-060122)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM 						OSR-2, CAB 
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 6 June 2002, for a period of 5 years.  He was   18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  The applicant's record indicates he served in two tours of combat in Iraq and has been awarded an ARCOM, an AGCM and a CAB.  He completed 4 years, 5 months, and 3 days of active duty service.


SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 18 September 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconduct.  Specifically for the following offenses: 

a. receiving an Article 15 for failure to be at his appointed place of duty and making a false official statement

b. receiving a second Article 15 for failing to be at his appointed place of duty

c. receiving a vacation of the suspended sentence imposed by an Article 15 for violating a general regulation

d. receiving numerous counseling's and corrective training for disobeying orders, failing to report to his appointed place of duty, disrespect and displaying an overall lack of proper conduct and discipline.

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.

3.  On 19 September 2006, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and submitted 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.  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 8 November 2006, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions; under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for a pattern of misconduct, with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and a 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.  A Company Grade Article 15, imposed on 1 August 2005, for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (050527).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-3, forfeiture of $339.00 pay (both suspended), extra duty for 14 days, and restriction for 10 days (CG).  The document makes reference to a continuation sheet; however; the continuation sheet was not found in the available records.

2.  A vacation of suspension, imposed on 22 December  2005, vacating the punishment of reduction to E-3 and forfeiture of $339.00 per month for one month imposed on 1 August 2005; for on diverse occasion between (051103 and 051121), violating a lawful general regulation by providing false information to his chain of command.

3.  A copy of a pending Bar to Reenlistment Certificate, dated 28 March 2006 as a result of several counseling statements and an Article 15.

4.  A Company Grade Article 15, imposed on 24 August 2006, for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 3 (060630, 060727, and 060810) and making a false official statement to a noncommissioned officer (060809).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-2 (suspended), forfeiture of $410.00 pay (suspended), extra duty for 14 days, and restriction for 14 days (suspended) (FG). 

5  Twenty-Three negative counseling statements dated between 2 June 2005 and                  18 September 2006, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty, being late for formation, failure to conduct proper personal hygiene, pending Bar for reenlistment, disrespect and disobeying of lawful orders, misuse of the American Red Cross emergency notification system, failure to carry a weapon, insubordinate conduct towards a noncommissioned officer, and pending administrative separation IAW AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 149 and a copy of his resume.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were provided with the application.

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 document 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 fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by 2 Articles 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and numerous negative counseling statements.

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 he had a good record to include his PT history and that his discharge was the result of a political situation.  The applicant’s 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.  Furthermore, 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.  The evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.

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: Records Review	     Date: 4 September 2013	Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NoA 

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)		AR20130005628



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1