IN THE CASE OF:	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	18 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006231
___________________________________________________________________________

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 is inequitable due to five years and eight months of honorable service, including a deployment to Afghanistan as a team leader, with one isolated incident.  He is requesting a change in his discharge status so that he may acquire a job in the law enforcement field.  He believes his request is warranted because he was a great Soldier/leader, who made one mistake that led to being separated from the one organization that he truly enjoyed.  He followed all the Army Values everyday and inspired his Soldiers to do the same.  He does not believe that the one mistake during almost six years should hinder his family’s future and a successful career in law enforcement.  He asks the opportunity to right his wrong doings by becoming an influential and positive member of society. 

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	29 March 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	21 March 2012
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, 
			Paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	Gold Coast Rctg Co, US Army Rctg Bn Fresno, US 
			Army 6th Rctg Bde, Ventura, CA
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	29 February 2008, 6 years 
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	4 years, 0 months, 23 days
	h.	Total Service:	6 years, 7 months, 7 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	DEP (050815-060704) / NA
			RA   (060705-080228) / HD
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-5
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	11B14, Infantryman
	m.	GT Score:	108
	n.	Education:	HS Graduate 
	o.	Overseas Service:	SWA
	p.	Combat Service:	Afghanistan (090721-100707)
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	ARCOM; AAM; AGCM; NDSM; ACM-2CS; 
			GWOTSM; NPDR; ASR; OSR; NATO MDL; CIB
	r.	Administrative Separation Board: 	No, waived board
	s.	Performance Ratings:	Yes 
	t.	Counseling Statements:	Yes 
	u.	Prior Board Review:	No 



SUMMARY OF SERVICE:  

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 July 2006, and reenlisted on 29 February 2008, for a period of 6 years.  He was 17 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He served in Afghanistan.  He earned an ARCOM and an AAM.  He completed 6 years, 7 months, and 7 days of active duty service and DEP.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record shows that on 9 January 2012, 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 of misconduct—commission of a serious offense, specifically for the following offenses:

	a.	In that he, on or about early April 2011, violated a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 2-2(d), UR 600-25, dated 4 February 2009, by wrongfully driving FS S home from the recruiting station without at least one qualified person present, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ;
	b.	In that he, on or about 29 April 2011, violated a lawful general regulation. to wit: paragraph 2-2(d), UR 600-25, dated 4 February 2009, by wrongfully driving FS S home, from a recruiting event, without at least one qualified person present, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ;
	c.	In that he, on or about 29 April 2011, violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 2-1(a)(1)(a), UR 600-25, dated 4 February 2009, by wrongfully having sexual intercourse with FS S, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ;
	d.	In that he, a married man, did, on or about 29 April 2011, wrongfully have sexual intercourse with FS S, a woman, not your wife, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ.

2.  The unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.

3.  On 14 February 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, and did not submit 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 6 March 2012, 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 21 March 2012, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions 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. 

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.  Article 15, dated 19 December 2011, violating a lawful general regulation on three occasions (early April 2011 and 110429), wrongfully having sexual intercourse with a woman, not his wife (110429).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-4, (FG). 

2.  An NCOER, which covers the period of 1 January 2011 to 19 December 2011.  The applicant was rated as “Marginal” and received 5/5 from the senior rater.

3.  An NCOER, which covers the period of 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2010.  The applicant was rated as “Fully Capable” and received 2/2 from the senior rater.

4.  DA Form 1059, Service School Academic Evaluation Report, dated 27 October 2010, indicating the applicant achieved the course standards of the Warrior Leader Course.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a copy of the first page an NCOER for period 1 January 2010 through 31 December 2010, and the second page of NCOER, ending 31 December 2009.  

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 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 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 serious incident 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 an Article 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

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 had good service which included serving over five years of honorable service, followed all the Army Values every day, and inspired his Soldiers—he was a great Soldier and leader who made one mistake.  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 serious incidents of misconduct or by the documented action under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

5.  Regarding the applicant’s contention of the isolated 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.  The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.

6.  The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment in the law enforcement.  However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

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 October 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)		AR20130006231



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1