IN THE CASE OF:	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:	31 January 2014

      CASE NUMBER:	AR20130015751
___________________________________________________________________________

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 did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade.  However, his application will be considered for a possible upgrade to an honorable discharge as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was young at the time of his discharge and he was trying to fit in with the wrong type of people.  He feels he has matured since his discharge.  He now understands his mistakes and has grown from them.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	26 August 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	28 December 2012
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-
			12b, JKA, RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	G Co, 26th BSB, 2nd BCT, 3ID, Fort Stewart, GA
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	16 June 2010, 3 years, 25 weeks
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 6 months, 13 days
	h.	Total Service:	2 years, 6 months, 13 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	None
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-3
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	91B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic
	m.	GT Score:	87
	n.	Education:	HS Graduate
	o.	Overseas Service:	None
	p.	Combat Service:	None
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	AAM; NDSM; ASR
	r.	Administrative Separation Board: 	No
	s.	Performance Ratings:	None
	t.	Counseling Statements:	Yes
	u.	Prior Board Review:	No 

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:  

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 June 2010, for a period of 3 years and 25 weeks.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He earned an AAM.  He completed 2 years, 6 months, and 13 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 13 November 2012, 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 offenses:

a. failing to be at his appointed place of duty (110406, 120808);
b. falsifying an official record on divers occasions (110311);
c. speeding (120811); and
d. being disrespectful in language and deportment towards a noncommissioned officer (120808).

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 27 November 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and elected to submit a statement on his own behalf but failed to do so.  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 12 December 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 28 December 2012, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for pattern of misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA 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 26 April 2011, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time (110406), falsifying an official record (110311).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-2, 14 days of extra duty and restriction, (CG). 

2.  Article 15, dated 5 September 2012, for speeding (120811), failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on two separate occasions (120808), being disrespectful in language and deportment towards an NCO (120808).  The punishment is not available in the current record, (CG).

3.  Thirteen negative counseling statements, dated between 29 March 2011 and 5 September 2012, for a moving violation in his POV; forging a military certificate; lying to an NCO; disobeying a lawful order; failing to be at his appointed place of duty; drinking while underage; and failing to be in proper uniform.


EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided none.

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 did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade.  However, the Army Discharge Review Board would consider the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed, in pertinent part, by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28, which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge.

2.  Accordingly, 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, and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

3.  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 pattern of 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 two Article 15 actions for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and numerous negative counseling statements.

4.  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.  

5.  The applicant contends that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge and has grown from his mistakes.  However, 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.

6.  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.  

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:  31 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:	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)		AR20130015751

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1