IN THE CASE OF:	Mr.

      BOARD DATE:  	18 September 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130005939
___________________________________________________________________________

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, and to change the narrative reason for his discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was discharged for patterns of misconduct.  He went AWOL and had a difficult time adjusting to military life as a young man.  He shamed his uniform, country, and unit.  He would like the chance to make things right again.  Since his discharge, he has become a husband and father of three beautiful girls, the latter who is now two weeks old.  His family means the world to him.  He has been working hard in the oil and gas industry, on and offshore.  His pay is of course very well; however, money is not everything.  He wants to go back in the Army and retire with honor and pride as he should have the first time but failed to do so because of his ignorant and foolish ways.  He would like another chance, now that he is older wiser with a family who he needs to be responsible for.  He will NOT make the same mistakes this time around ever again.  He has been going to recruiters and is told he is not able to enlist with a misconduct waiver at this time.  Therefore, he would like to get the reentry code changed and have his status changed so that he can walk in to his recruiter, head high and enlist with no problem.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	22 March 2013 
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	29 July 2003 
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, 
			RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	Co C, 704th DSB, 4th ID, Fort Hood, TX 
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	7 May 2001, 3 years
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 2 months, 2 days
	h.	Total Service:	2 years, 2 months, 2 days
	i.	Time Lost:	21 days
	j.	Previous Discharges:	None 
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-4
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	63S10, Heavy Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic
	m.	GT Score:	94
	n.	Education:	HS Graduate
	o.	Overseas Service:	None
	p.	Combat Service:	None
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	NDSM; ASR
	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 7 May 2001, for a period of 3 years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 63S10, Heavy Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic.  His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  He has completed 2 years, 2 months, and 2 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 16 July 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 (serious offense).  Specifically for the following offenses:  

a. being AWOL on four separate occasions (030412-030415, 030422-030424, 030502-030506, 030606-030618),
b. receiving two Article 15 punishments for AWOL, being disrespectful, and failure to repair.

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 16 July 2003, 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.  On 24 July 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 29 July 2003, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and an RE code of 3. 

6.  The applicant's record shows he was absent without leave (AWOL) on four separate occasions during the period 12 April 2003 through 14 April 2003; 22 April 2003 through 23 April 2003; 2 May 2003 through 5 May 2003; and 6 June 2003 through 17 June 2003.  The record further reflects he returned to his unit on his own accord after each period of AWOL.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Article 15, dated 19 June 2003, failing to report on 6 occasions (030303, 030306, 030307, 030421, 030428, 030430, and 030502), being disrespectful in deportment toward an NCO (030422), departing place of duty without authority (030425), and AWOL on 3 occasions (0304120030415, 030422-030424, and 030502-030506).  The punishment consisted forfeiture of $575, 30 days of extra duty and restriction, (FG). 

2.  Article 15, dated 7 July 2002, for AWOL (020304-020404), The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $552 (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and 45 days of restriction (suspended), (FG).

3.  Fourteen negative counseling statements dated between 24 February 2000 and 10 July 2003, for pending separation action; missing formations; leaving place of duty without authority; failing to report for duty; lying to three NCOs; disobeying orders; performing unsatisfactorily; disrespecting an NCO; and making false official statement.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided no further evidence.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant states, in effect, that he is now a husband and father of three children, works in the oil and gas industry both on and offshore.  

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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (serious offense).

5.  The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge and changes to the narrative reason and reentry code 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 or changes to the narrative reason and reentry code for his 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 serious incidents of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by two Article 15 punishments 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 that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge.  The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

5.  The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service.  However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code.  An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate.

6.  The applicant contends that since leaving the Army he has been employed with an oil and gas industry and is now a father of three children.  The applicant’s post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  

7.  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.  

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:  18 September 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	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions


ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20130005939



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1