IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	30 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006215
___________________________________________________________________________

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 that his general, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable and the narrative reason changed.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge is inequitable and unwarranted based upon his Army record and performance.  The incident noted in the recommendation for separation occurred in 2009, more than two years prior to him joining the US Army.  He had responded to the Oklahoma State Board of Licensed Social Workers in March of 2010, when contacted and assumed the issue had been dismissed.  He had no further contact with them until being notified in late July 2012.  It was not reflective of any behavior while he was on active duty.  He continued to meet the military requirement of having a Master’s degree in social work from a program accredited by the Council of Social Work Education.  Second, his licenses were current and unrestricted for practice.  The reason for discharge was based on AR 600-8-24, paragraph 4-2b(9), “ conduct or actions that result in the loss of a professional status, such as withdrawal, suspension or abandonment of professional license, endorsement, or certification that is directly or indirectly connected with or is necessary for the performance of his military duties.  Although he surrendered his Oklahoma license, he never lost any professional status as he was still licensed in two other states and fully met the licensing requirements to continue practicing in the military.  This type of discharge is stopping him from receiving his benefits.  The applicant continued listing the reasons for events that led to his discharge in the self-authored statement.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			29 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions 
c. Date of Discharge:				28 June 2012				
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Unacceptable Conduct, AR 600-8-24 								paragraph 4-2b, 4-24a(1), JNC, NA
e. Unit of assignment:				Company A, 187th Medical Battalion, 32d 							Medical Brigade, Fort Sam Houston, TX	
f. Current Entry Date/Term:			13 July 2011, NIF		
g. Current Term Net Active Service:		0 years, 11 months, 16 days	
h. Total Service:				0 years, 11 months, 16 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			None	
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			O-3
l. Branch:					67D, Behavioral Sciences
m. GT Score:					NA
n. Education:					College Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				None
p. Combat Service:				None
q. Decorations/Awards:			NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		No  
s. Performance Ratings:			No
t. Counseling Statements:			Yes
u. Prior Board Review:				No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant received a direct commission in the Regular Army on 13 July 2011.  He was
47 years old at the time and a college graduate.  The applicant’s record shows no acts of valor or meritorious achievements other than the awards listed in the paragraph above.  His record indicates he was at Fort Sam Houston, TX, when his discharge was initiated.  
	
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s service record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army.  However, the applicant provided a copy the memorandum directing him to show cause for retention in the Army based on AR 600-8-24, paragraphs 4-2(b)(9) and the Department of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board decision, due to his moral and professional dereliction; specifically, conduct and actions that resulted in the loss of his professional license.  The imposing authority’s decision was based on the following:  

	a. On 18 November 2011, the applicant voluntarily agreed to surrender his license as a social worker in the state of Oklahoma, pursuant to a Consent Order (Complaint No. 2009-13).

	b.  Consent Order (Complaint No. 2009-13) was agreed to by the applicant and the Oklahoma State Board of Licensed Social Workers, and accepted by the Oklahoma State Board of Licensed Social Workers on 18 November 2011.

	c.  The Oklahoma State Board of Licensed Social Workers directed the Board’s staff to notify, the other states where he was licensed of the Consent Order and the action taken against his license in Oklahoma.

2.  The record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214, (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature.  The DD Form 214 indicates that on 28 June 2012, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-40, paragraph 4-2b, by reason of unacceptable conduct, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge and a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JNC.

3.  On 18 June 2012, Department of Army, Headquarters U.S. Army North (Fifth Army) Joint Base, Fort Sam Houston, TX, issued Orders 170-0102, which discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, with an effective date of 28 June 2012. 

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

5.  The Department of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board reviewed the resignation in lieu of elimination tendered by the applicant based on misconduct and moral or professional dereliction.

6.  On 13 June 2012, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.   

7.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 28 June 2012, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions, under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, paragraph 4-2b, for unacceptable conduct.

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.  Academic Evaluation Report (110920), AMEDD BOLC 1 and 2, showing he achieved course standards.  

2.  A Certificate of Training (111021), showing he successfully completed the Combat Operational Stress Control course

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a copy of a DD Form 293, notification from State of Oklahoma (March 2012), response to notification from State of Oklahoma (March 2012), order of consent, State of Oklahoma, copy of current licenses, Board Certified Diplomate, working assignment, system request access (SAAR), notification of “Intention of Elimination”, rebuttal to “Intention of Elimination,” notification “Probationary Officer Elimination Case,” DD Form 214, and a self-authored statement.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided with the application. 

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-24, Officer Transfers and Discharges, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of commissioned and warrant officers.  Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security.

2.  AR 600-8-24, paragraph 1-22a, provides that an officer will normally receive an honorable characterization of service when the quality of the officer’s service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty.  An honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.

3.  A general under honorable conditions characterization of service will normally be issued to an officer when the officer’s military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A separation under honorable conditions will normally be appropriate when an officer submits an unqualified resignation or a request for relief from active duty under circumstances involving misconduct which renders the officer unsuitable for further service, unless an under other than honorable conditions separation is appropriate.

4.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is an administrative separation from the service under conditions other than honorable.  An officer will normally receive an under other than honorable conditions when they resign for the good of the service, are dropped from the rolls of the Army, are involuntarily separated due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or for the final revocation of a security clearance as a result of an act or acts of misconduct.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization and a reason change were  carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s military records and the issue submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge or change to the reason.  

2.  The applicant’s record is void of the complete 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 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 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-200, by reason of unacceptable conduct, with a characterization of service described as general, under honorable conditions.  Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

4.  The applicant's contentions were carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service.  Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs.  This presumption is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support a change to the characterization of service granted.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity in this case and the application contains no documentation or further corroborating evidence in support of the request for an upgrade of the discharge.  
5.  The applicant requested a change to the narrative reason for separation.  However, the narrative reason for separation is governed by specific directives.  The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2b, AR 600-8-24.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unacceptable Conduct," and the separation code is "JNC."  

6.  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There was no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation and no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. 

7.  The applicant contends this type of discharge is stopping him from receiving his benefits.   However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  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.  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) 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.

9.  Therefore, based on the available evidence and the presumption of government 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:  30 October 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)		AR20130006215



Page 2 of 7 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1