IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	27 June 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130017754
___________________________________________________________________________

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, that he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to utilize 100% of his GI Bill benefits.  He contends his discharge is inequitable because it is based on an isolated incident after four years and 11 months of service while stationed overseas.  He also contends he served in Iraq and Afghanistan and received several awards. 

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		23 September 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			24 August 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14 						Paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			2nd FA Btry, BCT, APO AE
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	19 October 2009, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 10 months, 6 days
h. Total Service:			5 years, 3 months, 29 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA-070426-091018/HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-5
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	13B10, Cannon Crewmember
m. GT Score:				113
n. Education:				HS Graduate 
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (080905-090816) and Afghanistan (100919-						110524)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AAM-2, AGCM, ACM-w/CS, ICM-w/2 CS
      NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL, CAB
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		Yes
t. Counseling Statements:		None
u. Prior Board Review:			No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:	

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 April 2007, for a period of 4 years and         17 weeks.  He was 20 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  On               19 October 2009, he reenlisted for 4 years.  His record indicates he served in Iraq and Afghanistan; achieved the rank of SGT/E-5; and achieved several awards to include the ARCOM, two AAMs, and the AGCM.  He completed 5 years, 3 months, and 29 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 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, AR 635-200, for a pattern of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKA and a reentry (RE) code of 3.  

3.  On 8 August 2012, DA, Installation Management Command-Europe, Vilseck Transition Center, APO AE, Orders Number 221-0011, discharged the applicant from the Army effective 24 August 2012.

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  An MP Report dated 22 August 2010, that indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for drunk driving. 

2.  Article 15, imposed on 27 September 2010, for unlawfully strangling PFC M.K.H, with his hands and slammed her against the wall (100418) and was drunk and disorderly (100418).  The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-4, forfeiture of $1,047.00 per month for one month ($500.00 suspended), and extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).

3.  An MP Report dated 11 August 2011, that indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for driving while intoxicated and failure to obey order or regulation. 

4.  A Field Grade Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated 9 November 2011, for operating a motor vehicle on a public road while under the influence of alcohol with a breath alcohol test reading of 0.054.

5.  Discharge Orders 221-0011, dated 8 August 2012.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 16 September 2013 and a copy of his DD Form 214 for the period of service under review.
POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were 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.

ANALSYT’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 available 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 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 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 14-12b by reason of a pattern of misconduct, 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 contends his discharge was based on an isolated indecent; that he had good service which included deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan and received several awards.  The applicant's contentions 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 expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to receive full post 9/11 benefits.  However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill.

7.  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:  1	No Change:  4
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)		AR20130017754



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1