1.	APPLICANT’S NAME: 

	a.	Application Date:  24 March 2015

	b.	Date Received:  3 April 2015

	c.	Counsel:  None

2.   REQUEST, REASON, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION:  The applicant requests to upgrade the characterization of his discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.  The applicant states, in effect, an upgrade would allow him to return to school by using his Post 9/11 GI Bill that he paid into.

In a records review conducted at Arlington, Virginia, on 11 September 2015, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable.

	(Board member names available upon request.)

3.	DISCHARGE DETAILS:

	a.	Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization:  Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General, Under Honorable Conditions

	b.	Date of Discharge:  3 October 2006

	c.	Separation Facts:  

		(1)	Date of Notification of Intent to Separate:  14 August 2006

		(2)	Basis for Separation:  The applicant was informed the basis for initiating his separation proceedings were the following:  

	Receiving a CG Article 15 on 31 May 2006, for being found guilty of failing to go to his appointed place of duty on two separate occasions, in violation of Article 86, UCMJ.  The punishment consisted of a reduction to Private (E-1), restriction for 14 days and extra duty for 14 days;
	Receiving a CG Article 15 on 6 March 2006, for being guilty of failing to go to his appointed place of duty on four separate occasions, in violation of Article 86, UCMJ and disobeying an NCO, in violation of Article 91, UCMJ.  The punishment consisted of a reduction to Private (E-2), and extra duty for 14 days; and
	Receiving developmental counseling statements on 15 June 2006, for failing to report; on 
15 June 2006 for willfully disobeying a commissioned officer; on 6 February 2006, for willfully disobeying of an NCO; on 13 December 2005, for failing to report; and on 10 November 2005, for willfully disobeying an NCO.

		(3)	Recommended Characterization:  General, Under Honorable Conditions discharge

		(4)	Legal Consultation Date:  15 August 2006  

		(5)	Administrative Separation Board:  None

		(6)	Separation Decision Date/Characterization:  29 September 2006 / General, Under Honorable Conditions discharge

4.	SERVICE DETAILS:

	a.	Date/Period of Enlistment:  28 October 2004 / 3 years, 28 weeks

	b.	Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score:  19 / HS Graduate / 114

	c.	Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service:  E-3 / 63B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic / 1 year, 11 months, 6 days
  
	d.	Prior Service/Characterizations:  None
  
	e.	Overseas Service/Combat Service:  None / None
  
	f.	Awards and Decorations:  NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR
  
	g.	Performance Ratings:  None
  
	h.	Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record:  

	CG Article 15, dated 31 May 2006, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on two separate occasions (5 April 2006 and 4 May 2006).  The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, and 14 days of restriction and extra duty.
	CG Article 15, dated 6 March 2006, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on four separate occasions (1 March 2006, 13 July 2005, 11 July 2005 x 2) and disobeying an NCO on 18 July 2005.  The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2 and 14 days of extra duty.
	Negative counseling statements for being AWOL; failing to obey an order or regulation; being insubordinate towards an NCO; malingering; failing to complete corrective training; failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time; failing to comply with procedural rules; failing to clear his barracks room; and having financial problems. 
  
	i.	Lost Time:  None
  
	j.	Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health:  The Chronological Record of Medical Care dated 12 July 2006, indicates no psychiatric diagnosis or condition on Axis I.  The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by the command. 

5.	APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE:  None

6.	POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS:  None provided




7.	REGULATORY CITATION(S):  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.   

Paragraph 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army.

8.	DISCUSSION OF ISSUE(S):  The applicant requests to upgrade the characterization of his discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.  

The applicant’s record of service and the issues submitted with his application were carefully reviewed.

The record confirms 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 documentary evidence that established the pattern of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  

The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  

The applicant seeks relief contending an upgrade would allow him to return to school by using his Post 9/11 GI Bill that he paid into.  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.  In addition, the Board does not grant relief on the basis of obtaining veterans’ benefits.  

In view of the above, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and the applicant was provided full administrative due process.



9.	BOARD ACTION DIRECTED:

	a.	Issue a new DD-214:  			No
	
	b.	Change Characterization to:  		No Change

	c.	Change Reason to:  				No Change

	d.	Change SPD/RE Code to:  			No Change

	e.	Restore (Restoration of) Grade to:  	NA


AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL:  




COL, US ARMY
Presiding Officer
Army Discharge Review Board























Legend:
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial 
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School		OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	SPD - Separation Program Designator
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury
CID - Criminal Investigation Division	MP – Military Police	PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
ELS – Entry Level Status	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	RE - Reentry	UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
FG - Field Grade Article 15	NA - Not applicable	SCM - Summary Court Martial	

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

AR20150006093


4