IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	21 May 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20140006886
___________________________________________________________________________

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.  The applicant states, in effect, he received nonjudicial punishment for being AWOL, and was discharged for the same offense.  He served with no other offenses; and he believes that his mental disorder caused his mistake.  He needs an upgrade to move forward with his education and career.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		16 April 2014
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			5 March 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter
      14, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			609th Combat Support Battalion (Fires), Fort Sill, OK
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	7 November 2007, 6 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	4 years, 1 months, 6 days
h. Total Service:			5 years, 8 months, 20 days
i. Lost time:				83 days
j. Previous Discharges:		RA (060323-071106)/HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-5
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	63J1P, Quartermaster & Chemical Equipment							Repairer
m. GT Score:				NIF
n. Education:				GED Certificate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Iraq x 2 (070102-080317), (090820-100726)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM-4, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-W/3 CS	 						GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR, OSR-2, CAB
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		Yes
t. Counseling Statements:		NIF
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 March 2006, for a period of 3 years and 23 weeks.  He was 19 years old at the time of entry with a GED Certificate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 63J1P, Quartermaster & Chemical Equipment Repairer.  He reenlisted on 7 November 2007, for a period of 6 years and he was 20 years old at the time.  His record also shows that he served a combat tour, earned several awards including an ARCOM-4, AAM, AGCM, and a CAB; he achieved the rank of SGT/E-5.  He was serving at Fort Sill, OK when his discharge was initiated.
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s service record is void of the complete 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 digital signature.

2.  The DD Form 214 indicates that on 5 March 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 did not reveal any recorded actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  However, he was separated as a SPC/E-4 and the action that caused his reduction is not contained in the service record.

4.  On 24 February 2012, DA, US Army Installation Management Command, HQS, US Army Garrison, Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK, Orders Number 055-1301 discharged the applicant from the Army effective 5 March 2012.

5.  The applicant’s record of service indicates 83 days of time lost for being AWOL from           2 August 2011 until 24 October 2011, mode of return unknown.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  The record contains discharge orders number 055-1301, dated 24 February 2012.

2.  The record also contains a DD Form 214, dated 5 March 2012.

3.  A DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 19 March 2009 indicated the applicant achieved course standards.

4.  The applicant received two successful NCOERs covering the periods from 1 November 2008 through 31 October 2010 and a marginal NCOER covering the period 1 November 2010 through 31 October 2011.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, ARCOM Citation, a Certificate from Paris Junior College, DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), an NCOER, deployment roster, a DA Form 1059, and a DD Form 214.  The applicant stated on his application that he submitted his PTSD diagnosis from a civilian facility, which was not included with his application.



POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

The applicant stated in his application he went to college and is starting a small business.

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 his available 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 complete 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 digital 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, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 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 contends he received nonjudicial punishment for being AWOL and was discharged for the same offense.  The available 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. 

5.  The applicant further contends he served with no other offenses; and he believes his mental disorder caused his mistake.  This contention was carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. 

6.  Further, the service record contains no evidence of a PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.

7.  Also, the rationale the applicant provided as the basis for what he believes was an unfair discharge and that his mental disorder caused his misconduct is not supportable by the evidence contained in the available record and can only be viewed as speculative in nature.

8.  The applicant requests an upgrade to move forward with his education and career.  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.

9.  Additionally, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

10  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.

11.  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 the analyst recommends the Board deny relief.



SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Record Review       Date:  21 May 2014       Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  No 

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)		AR20140006886



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1