IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	8 January 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130009482
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

1.  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.

2.  However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant’s discharge, the Board found that the applicant’s DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, and 28, contain erroneous entries. 

3.  The Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant’s DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority:

	a.  block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c.
	b.  block 26, separation code changed to JKQ.
	c.  block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Serious Offense).





      
      
      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, that he would like to continue attending school for his degree so that he can be competitive in the job market.  He would like to have his discharge upgraded to honorable in an effort to use his GI Bill.  He served almost 18 years of active duty and part of the reason for his discharge was based on a wrist injury that interfered with his duties for which, he currently receives veterans’ disability.     
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		17 May 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			19 May 2005
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct, AR 635-200, 14-12c(1), JKF, RE-3        
e. Unit of assignment:			HHC, USAMEDDAC, Fort Lee, VA 
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	2 August 2001, 6 years 
g. Current Enlistment Service:	3 years, 9 months, 18 days
h. Total Service:			17 years, 7 months, 20 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA/870930-910530/HD										RA/910531-940229/HD										RA/940301-970807/HD										RA/970808-010801/HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-6	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	91W2H, Health Care Specialist 
m. GT Score:				112
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Germany, Korea, Bosnia
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AAM-4, JMUA, ASUA, AGCM-5, NDSM, 						NATOMDL, GWOTSM, KDSM, NCPDR-2, ASR, 						OSR-3
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		Yes
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes	
u. Prior Board Review:			No




SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 September 1987, for a period of 4 years.  He was 24 years old at the time of entry and was a high graduate.  He was serving at Fort Lee, VA, when his discharge was initiated.  The record reflects the applicant reenlisted 4 times during his time in service.  He was promoted several times throughout his in time service reaching the grade of E-6.  The service record also shows the applicant received several awards, including an ARCOM,4 AAM’s, JMUA, ASUA, AGCM-5, and an NDSM.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence shows that on 11 April 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for commission of a serious offense.  Specifically for the applicant’s misconduct between August and December 2004, he committed various offenses under the UCMJ, to include conspiracy to commit obstruction of justice (Article 92), failure to obey a lawful order (Article 91), violation of a lawful general regulation (Article 92), providing a false official statement (Article 107), adultery (Article 134), and obstruction of justice (Article 134). 

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the commander recommended an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 12 April 2005, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and submitted a statement on his behalf.  The applicant voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon receiving a general discharge.  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 25 April 2005, 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 19 May 2005, for misconduct, under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(1), with an SPD Code of JKF, and an RE code 
of 3.

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  An AR 15-6 investigation with allied documents, completed 19 November 2004.  The scope of the investigation addressed allegations of sexual misconduct against the applicant based on his relationship with an AIT Soldier.

2.  Article 15, dated 18 April 2005, for 10 violations of the UCMJ.  The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-5, and forfeiture of $1,225.00 per month for two months. 

3.  A General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 22 February 2005, for engaging in inappropriate behavior and relationships with relationships with female subordinate Soldiers that compromised the integrity of supervisory authority; caused actual or perceived partiality; and created an adverse impact on discipline, authority and morale, in violation of AR 600-20.
      
4.  Article 15, dated 11 March 2003, for wrongfully staying off his assigned post during the prescribed hours of curfew (021228).  The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $615.00 pay for one month, extra duty for 14 days, and 14 days restriction (CG).

5.  Two negative counseling statements for inappropriate behavior/relationship (040820), and allegations of inappropriate relationships with IET Soldiers (041006). 

6.  15 NCOERs covering the rating period from 31 August 1993 through 31 April 2004.  All of the evaluations reflected successful ratings with recommendations for promotion to the next grade.  

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 13 May 2013, and a DD Form 214.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided 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 the applicant’s service record and the issue 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 general or a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by two Articles 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and an administrative 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.  However, the service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered the reason for separation as misconduct, authority as AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(1), and SPD code of JKF.  However, the separation authority approved the discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (serious offense).

5.  The applicant contends he would like to continue attending school for his degree so that he can be competitive in the job market and would like to use his GI Bill.  However, 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.

6. The fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing.  The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels.  

7.  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.  

9.  However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant’s discharge, the Analyst found that the applicant’s DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, and 28, contain erroneous entries. 

10.  The Analyst recommended the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant’s DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority:

	a.  block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c.
	b.  block 26, separation code changed to JKQ.
	c.  block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Serious Offense).

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review     Date:  8 January 2014     Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  0	No Change:  5
Reason Change:	5	No Change:  0
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		Yes
Change Characterization to:	No Change
Change Reason to:			Misconduct (Serious Offense)
Change Authority for Separation:	AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Other:					Separation Program Designator (SPD) code JKQ



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)		AR20130009482



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1