IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	23 March 2015

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20150000577
___________________________________________________________________________

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 notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board noted that the government introduced a document into the discharge process, revealing a referral to ADAPCP based on information provided by the applicant concerning substance abuse.  This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85.  Use of this information mandates award of an honorable discharge.  Accordingly, the Board voted to change the characterization of service to honorable.  The Board found the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record, and voted not to change it.  



      
      
      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 his discharge was improper due to improper fraternization on the part of his noncommissioned officer staff.  He believes he could not say no to "hanging out" with them; and he got into lots of trouble.  He contends his wife requested help and they refused.  He was allowed to gain access to substances that caused him to lose his rank and act irrational.  He was young with potential and was failed by his unit.  He contends he has since recovered from his addiction and requests an upgrade of his discharge so he can provide a better life for his family.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		5 January 2015
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			30 October 2001
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14 						Paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			608th OD Ammunition, Fort Benning, GA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	29 September 1999, 3 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 1 month, 2 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 1 month, 2 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	55B10, Ammunition Specialist
m. GT Score:				90
n. Education:				GED
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		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 29 September 1999, for a period of 3 years.  He was 19 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED).  He was serving at Fort Benning, Georgia, when his discharge was initiated.  The record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements.  He completed 2 years, 1 month, and 2 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 2 October 2001, 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 a pattern of misconduct.  Specifically for the following offenses:

a. received a CG Article 15 for underage drinking (001222),

b. being reported by the Family Advocacy Program Case Review Committed for severely abusing his spouse (010320), and

c. receiving counseling for failing to be at his appointed place of duty (010531).

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 3 October 2001, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and indicated his intentions to submit a statement on his own behalf which was not found in the available record.  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 17 October 2001, it appears the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  The separation authority's signature page was not found in the available record.

5.  On 30 October 2001, DA, HQ, United States Infantry Center, Fort Benning, Georgia, Orders Number 303-2214, discharged the applicant from the Army, effective 30 October 2001.

6.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 30 October 2001, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for a pattern of misconduct, with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and a RE code of 3. 

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



EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  A Military Police Report dated 8 December 2000, which indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for failure to obey a lawful order, driving under the influence of alcohol/underage, and failing to drive on roadway lane for traffic.

2.  Memorandum, dated 20 March 2001, which shows the Fort Benning Family Advocacy Program Case Review Committee (CRC), received a report of spouse maltreatment involving the family of the applicant whereas they substantiated severe spouse abuse of the wife by the applicant and mild spouse abuse of the applicant by the wife with a recommended treatment plan.

3.  A Military Police Report dated 3 August 2001, which indicates the applicant was the subject of investigation for simple assault.

4.  Two negative counseling statements dated 31 May 2001 and 9 July 2001, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty and notification of pending Chapter 14 discharge.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provide 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.

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

2.  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 his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by his acts of misconduct which included spouse abuse, underage drinking, and failing to be at his appointed place of duty.

3.  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.  

4.  The applicant contends his discharge was improper; however, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that his discharge was improper.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge.

5.  The applicant contends he was young with potential and was failed by his unit.  He contends he has since recovered from his addiction and requests an upgrade of his discharge so he can provide a better life for his family.  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.

7.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief. 

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 notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board noted that the government introduced a document into the discharge process, revealing a referral to ADAPCP based on information provided by the applicant concerning substance abuse.  This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85.  Use of this information mandates award of an honorable discharge.  Accordingly, the Board voted to change the characterization of service to honorable.  The Board found the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record, and voted not to change it.  



SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Personal Appearance	  Date:  23 March 2015       Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes 

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE:

The applicant submitted no additional documents or contentions.

Board Vote:
Character Change:   3	No Change:  2
Reason Change:	 0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:			Yes
Change Characterization to:		Honorable
Change Reason to:				No Change
Change Authority for Separation:		No Change
Change RE Code to:			No Change
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)		AR20150000577



Page 2 of 7 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1