IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	2 May 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130014383
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the examiner’s 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.  He states, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on a single incident during three and half years of outstanding service.  He was young and still learning from his mistakes and asks the Board for leniency and mercy.  His adjustment disorder was the cause of a couple small mistakes after his initial incident of misconduct.  Some people who did the same thing in higher dollar amounts than his received less punishment and were allowed to remain in the military.  The applicant desires a second chance to redeem himself and be the Soldier he was before this incident.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		5 August 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			29 July 2013
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, 							Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			HHC, 4th Brigade Special Troops Battalion, 4th 						Armored Brigade Combat Team, Fort Bliss, TX
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	25 February 2010, 3 years and 25 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	3 years, 5 months, 5 days
h. Total Service:			3 years, 5 months, 5 days
i. Lost time:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	91B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic
m. GT Score:				112
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board:	No
s. Performance Ratings:		No
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 February 2010, for a period of 3 years and 25 weeks.  He was 17 years old at the time of entry and a HS Graduate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic.  His record does not show he served in combat, but he earned several awards including an ARCOM, AGCM; and he achieved the rank of SPC/E-4.  He was serving at Fort Bliss, TX when his discharge was initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 9 July 2013, 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 (serious offense).  Specifically for the following offenses:

     a.  failing to follow written orders on divers occasions,

     b.  altering documents, and

     c.  failing to pay his debts.

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 10 July 2013, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and indicated he intended to submit a statement on his behalf which is not contained in the available record.  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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 15 July 2013, 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 29 July 2013, 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), with 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.  An Article 15, dated 4 April 2013, for wrongfully misusing a government credit card in the amount being said less than $500 dollars (130204); the punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $758 pay x 2 months, extra duty for 45 days, and restriction for 45 days, (FG).  

2.  The applicant received six negative counseling statements, dated between 25 March 2013 and 30 April 2013 for potentially misusing a Government Credit Card, modifying his quarters sick call slip (DA form 689), failing to pay his star card bill, failing to report to his appointments on numerous occasions, being informed of pending chapter.

3.  A DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 28 May 2013, which indicated the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder, he acknowledged and agreed to utilize the established protocol for accessing care during duty hours or after hours; and was cleared for administrative proceedings.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, a (Report of Mental Status Evaluation, three pages), battalion government travel credit card delinquency report (two pages), and a DD Form 214.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

The applicant did not provide any information with his 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.

ANALYST’S 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 issues and documents 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 (serious offense), 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, six negative counseling statements, and a battalion government travel credit card delinquency report.

3.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  

4.  The applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was based on a single incident during three and half years of outstanding service.  The service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline

5.  Further, 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 the discharge under review.

6.  The applicant further contends he was young and still learning from his mistakes and asks the Board for leniency and mercy.  The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

7.  The applicant also contends his adjustment disorder was the cause of a couple of small mistakes after his initial incident of misconduct.  The service record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication.

8.  The applicant additionally contends some people who did the same thing in higher dollar amounts than his, received less punishment and were allowed to remain in the military.  However, the method in which another Soldier’s case was handled is not relevant to the applicant’s case.  Applicable regulations state that each case must be decided on an individual basis considering the unique facts and circumstances of that particular case.

9.  Moreover, 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.

10.  The applicant desires to reenlist in the Army and continue serving.  Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  There is no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code.  An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 

11.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

12.  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:  2 May 2014         Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify:  No

Counsel:  None

Board Vote:
Character  	Change:  2	No Change:  3
Reason	Change:  2	No Change:  3
(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 RE Code to:  		NA
Grade Restoration to:  		NA
Change Authority for Separation:	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)		AR20130014383



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1