IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	10 June 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20140004558
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony 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 was removed from the US Army after almost a decade of service.  He had never been in trouble before and was rated as a great Soldier and good leader.  No attempts were made to rehabilitate or try to lessen the punishment (i.e. non-judicial punishment, counseling), and his separation took place during the MEB/PEB.  Neither his disabilities (70 percent DOD and 90 percent VA) nor his three special needs children were considered.  The separation authority made it clear to him that the US Army was suffering from budget cuts and not letting Soldiers who made mistakes retire.  In summary, when he returned from Iraq he and his wife became involved in the adult alternative lifestyle/BDSM scene.  He was part of this scene in private with his spouse and no fraternization was involved.  In 2012, he asked permission from his commander to work at their business running legal events in the region.  His commander denied his proposal and chose to bring it to the battalion’s commander attention.  The day after his meeting with the battalion commander, his clearance was suspended, he was sent for a command referred mental health evaluation, and dismissed as the unit's SHARP VA representative.  This along with a lot of other issues led to an attempted suicide and prolonged separation from his family.  He finally got treatment for his Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) issues surrounding anxiety, depression, adrenalin addiction, and suicidal thoughts.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		10 March 2014
b. Discharge received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			25 November 2013
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter
      14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			D Company, 1st CYB AS, Fort Meade, MD
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	17 July 2008, 5 years, (includes a 12 month 
      extension)	
g. Current Enlistment Service:	5 years, 4 months, 9 days
h. s Total Service:			9 years, 1 month, 27 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA (040929-080716), HD										(Concurrent Service)
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-6
l.  Military Occupational Specialty:	35N30, Signal Intelligence Analyst
m. GT Score:				121
n. Education:				Masters Degree
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (070922-080930)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AAM-2, AGCM-3, NDSM, ICM-CS 							GWOTSM, MOVSM, NPDR, ASR, MUC-2
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 29 September 2004 for a period of 5 years.  He was 20 years old at the time of entry and was a high school graduate.  He reenlisted on 17 July 2008, for a period of five years.  His record indicates he served a combat tour in Iraq and at the time of his discharge he was serving at Fort Meade, MD.  His record shows he was awarded an ARCOM, two AAMs, and three AGCMs.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army.  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.  He was discharged as a SSG/E-6.

2.  The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  The DD Form 214 shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKQ and a reentry (RE) code of 3.  

3.  The applicant’s record contains no evidence of time lost or any action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

4.  The applicant was separated under Orders 312-0004, HQS, US Army Garrison, Fort George G. Meade, MD, with an effective date of on 25 November 2013.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  Five NCOERs covering the period 1 November 2007 through 26 November 2013.  The first four NCOERs were successful; however, the last NCOER reflected the negative misconduct.  

2.  Three successful Service School Academic Evaluation Reports.

3.  There are no counseling statements or UCMJ actions in the record.  

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

The applicant provided an online DD Form 293, DD Form 214, an Enlisted Record Brief (ERB), self-authored statement, six character reference letters, four NCOERs, an awards list, Informal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) proceedings, Department of the Veterans Affairs documents, and children’s disability information, and American Legion Brief.
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.

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 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.      

3.  The DD Form 214 indicates that 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 being a good Soldier, never being in trouble before, not given a chance to be rehabilitated, his separation taking place during the MEB/PEB, not having his disabilities taken into consideration, nor his three special needs children were carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service or the specific reason for the discharge.  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.   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:  Personal Appearance     Date:  10 June 2014     Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: No

Witnesses/Observers:  NA

\DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE:

1.  The applicant submitted no additional documents:

2.  The applicant presented the additional contentions:

	a.  That he was given an option to go through PEB/MEB but the company commander opted to separate him with a Chapter 14-12c; then an administrative separation board convened and recommended UOTHC. The GCMA did not agree with the characterization and directed separation with a general discharge.

	b.  He also avers that he was charged with misconduct (adultery, false official statements).

In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing.
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 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)		AR20140004558



Page 5 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1