IN THE CASE OF:	Mr.

      BOARD DATE:	27 June 2014

      CASE NUMBER:	AR20130016556
___________________________________________________________________________

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 to upgrade the characterization of his service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable.  

2.  The applicant states, in pertinent part and in effect, the main purpose for his request is to solidify himself as an honorably served veteran in the U.S. Army, and to pursue the educational benefits to better himself and the benefit of a future family, he hopes to have one day.  He understands the severity of his offense that he was caught up in, an unfortunate event, which he regrets daily—he has never been in trouble before.  He served honorably during his Iraq deployment (2009-2010).  Since his discharge, he has strived to get his life back on track, working a full-time job, having a place of his own, and paying his own bills.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	9 September 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	24 August 2012
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200 
			Paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	A Co, 4-17th Infantry, Fort Bliss, TX
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	20 June 2007, 5 years, 16 weeks
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	5 years, 2 months, and 5 days
	h.	Total Service:	5 years, 2 months, and 5 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	None
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-4
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	11B10, Infantryman
	m.	GT Score:	NIF
	n.	Education:	HS Graduate
	o.	Overseas Service:	SWA
	p.	Combat Service:	Iraq (090724-100707)
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	ARCOM; AGCM; NDSM; ICM-CS; GWOTSM; ASR 
			OSR; CIB
	r.	Administrative Separation Board: 	No
	s.	Performance Ratings:	None
	t.	Counseling Statements:	NIF
	u.	Prior Board Review:	No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 June 2007, for a period of 5 years and 16 weeks.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B10, Infantryman.  He served in Iraq.  He earned an ARCOM.  He completed 5 years, 2 months, and 5 days of active duty service.
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s service record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was digitally authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  

2.  The DD Form 214 indicates that on 24 August 2012, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for Misconduct (Serious Offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKQ and a reentry (RE) code of 3.  

3.  The applicant’s available record does not show any recorded actions under the UCMJ, unauthorized absences or time lost.  

4.  On 21 August 2012, HQDA, 1st Armored Division and Fort Bliss, Fort Bliss, TX, Orders Number 234-0025, discharged the applicant from the Army, effective 24 August 2012.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

Discharge orders.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided DD Form 214 for service under current review and four employment earning statements, dated 15 August 2013 through 5 September 2013.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant states, in effect, since his discharge, he has strived to get his life back on track, working a full-time job, having a place of his own, and paying his own bills.  

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

2.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was digitally authenticated by the applicant's signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process.  

3.  The DD Form 214 also indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c by reason of misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

4.  The applicant's contentions about understanding of the severity of his offense that he was caught up in, an unfortunate event, which he regrets daily, and has never been in trouble before, and that he served honorably including his combat tour in Iraq were carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service.  Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge.  

5.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record.

6.  The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow receiving the educational benefits through the use of the 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.

7.  The applicant contends that since his discharge, he has strived to get his life back on track, working a full-time job, having a place of his own, and paying his own bills.  The applicant’s post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and in the documents with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears that these accomplishments do not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted at this time.  

8.  Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief.

























SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review      Date:  27 June 2014        Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  No

Board Vote:
Character Change:  2	No Change:  3
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)		AR20130016556

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1