IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	1 November 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130007417
___________________________________________________________________________

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 was unable to receive any additional chances from his chain of command.  Since his discharge from the Army, he completed several drug and alcohol classes, as well as counseling.  He requests an upgrade of his discharge so it does not hinder him in the future.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 		15 April 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			20 May 2008
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Pattern of Misconduct , AR 635-200, Chapter 14 						paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			E Co, 4-3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment (The Old Guard) 						Fort Myer, VA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	5 September 2007, 6 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 8 months, 16 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 8 months, 16 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA (050415-070904)/HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	11B10, Infantryman
m. GT Score:				114
n. Education:				13 years
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, EIB
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 15 April 2005, for a period of 4 years and 19 weeks.  He was 23 years old at the time of entry and had completed one year of college.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B10, Infantryman.  He reenlisted on 5 September 2007, for a period of 6 years and was 25 years old at the time.  His record also shows he did not serve in combat; however, he earned several awards including an AAM, EIB and he achieved the rank of SPC/E-4.  He was serving at Fort Myer, VA when his discharge was initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 31 March 2008, 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 offense:

     a.  assaulting his wife on two occasions and on one occasion he struck her in the head with a candle

     b.  driving his car under the influence of alcohol

     c.  disobeying an order from CPT TH not to leave post without an NCO or Officer

     d.  disobeyed a no contact order from CPT H not to have any contact with his wife

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 1 April 2008, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted 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 30 April 2008, 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 20 May 2008, 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 5 February 2008 for assaulting his wife x 2 (071109, 070813), by pointing the tip of the knife at her, and throwing a candle striking her in the head; the punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, reduction below the rank of E-2 (suspended), forfeiture of $650 pay x 2 months (1 month suspended), extra duty for 45 days, and restriction for 45 days, (FG).

2.  The record contains an administrative General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 1 February 2008 for driving while intoxicated (DWI).
3.  A DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 6 March 2008 which indicated the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command.

4.  He received three negative counseling statements which were completed between               15 January 2007 through 10 January 2008, for disobeying a lawful order, breaking restriction, receiving a DUI, violating a no contact order, lying to his platoon sergeant, financial and legal responsibilities to his spouse, and domestic violence.

5.  A Metropolitan Police Report, Prosecution Report-DUI, dated 12 January 2008 which indicated the applicant was arrested for DWI.

6.  An Offense/Incident Report, dated 9 November 2007 which revealed the applicant assaulted his wife.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an online application and a DD Form 214.

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 his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining his military record 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 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, three negative counseling statements and a GOMOR.

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 was unable to receive any additional chances from his chain of command.  However, 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.

5.  The applicant further contends since his discharge from the Army, he completed several drug and alcohol classes, as well as counseling.  The applicant is to be commended for his efforts.  This contention is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued.

6.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge so it does not hinder him in the future.
The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

7.  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:  1 November 2013       Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify:  No

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)		AR20130007417



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1