IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr.

      BOARD DATE:  	18 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130007223
___________________________________________________________________________

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, he finished his extra duty and was told by his brigade S-3 that it would be expunged from his records; his company told him that he had to wait 180 days for them to expunge the Company Grade Article 15 from his records and it was not expunged; and he was passed up for promotions because of the Article 15.  He did not receive any of his awards from missions he participated in such as SECOMP and others, and he was not given what was owed him to move forward in his career.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date 		12 April 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			16 August 2010
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14, 						paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			206th Signal Company, 18th Fires Brigade, 							Fort Bragg, NC
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	22 April 2008, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 3 months, 25 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 3 months, 25 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	25U1P, Signal Support Systems Specialist
m. GT Score:				113
n. Education:				HS 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 April 2008, for a period of 4 years.  He was 20 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 25U1P, Signal Support Systems Specialist.  His record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements, and he achieved the rank of PV2/E-2.  He was serving at Fort Bragg, NC when his discharge was initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 29 June 2010, 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 a pattern of misconduct.  Specifically for the following offenses:

     a.  failing to report x 8 (090528, 090604, 090609, 090709, 090721, 091116, 100325, 100419)

     b.  failing to obey a lawful order or regulation x 2 (090616, 100414)

     c.  being disrespectful to a noncommissioned officer (NCO) x 5 (090127, 090423, 091124, 100202, 100419)

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 6 July 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, 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 16 July 2010, 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’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

6  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 16 August 2010, 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, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and an RE code of 3.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  An Article 15, dated 16 July 2009, for without authority, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 3 (090609, 090604, 090528); the punishment consisted of reduction to E-1 (suspended), forfeiture of $326 pay x 1 month (suspended), and extra duty for 30 days, (CG).

2.  He received 15 negative counseling statements which were completed between                 27 January 2009 and 19 April 2010, for violating numerous Articles of the UCMJ on divers occasions, failing to report on more than one occasion, failing to pay a debt, disrespecting an NCO on divers occasions, disrespecting an order or regulation on more than one occasion, and being counseled on Chapter 14 separation action.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an online application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any 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 her discharge and a change to the RE code was carefully considered.  However, after examining her military record, the issues and document submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge or a change to the narrative reason for 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 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 an Article 15 and fifteen 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 finished his extra duty and was told by his brigade S-3 that it would be expunged from his records; his company told him that he had to wait 180 days for them to expunge the Company Grade Article 15 from his records, it was not expunged; and he was passed up for promotions because of the Article 15.  The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was advised the Article 15 would be expunged from his record.

5.  Further, 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.

6.  The applicant further contends he did not receive any of his awards from missions he participated in such as SECOMP and others, and he was not given what was owed him to move forward in his career.  However, his contention does not fall within the purview of this Board.  The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter.  A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. 

7.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service to include the RE code 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)		AR20130007223



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1