AR20140000529

IN THE CASE OF: Mr.

BOARD DATE: 29 October 2014

CASE NUMBER: AR20140000529
___________________________________________________________________________

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 APPLICANTS REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge characterization from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2. The applicant states, in effect, that he paid into the GI bill fund for a year and cant receive the benefits due to not having an honorable discharge.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 23 December 2013
b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 19 April 2005
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: HHD, 31st Combat Support Hospital, Fort Bliss, TX
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 7 March 2001, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service: 4 years, 1 month, 13 days
h. Total Service: 4 years, 1 month, 13 days
i. Time Lost: None
j. Previous Discharges: None
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 25U10, Signal Support System Specialist
m. GT Score: 101
n. Education: 13 years
o. Overseas Service: SWA
p. Combat Service: Kuwait and Iraq (040106-050107)
q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: No
s. Performance Ratings: None
t. Counseling Statements: Yes
u. Prior Board Review: No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant’s record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 March 2001, for a period of 4 years. He was 21 years old at the time and had 13 years of education. When his discharge proceeding were initiated he was serving at the Fort Bliss, TX. His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement; however, he served a combat tour in Kuwait and Iraq.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1. On 28 February 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to process him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of pattern of misconduct; specifically for failing to be at his appointed place of duty on four separate occasions, and stealing merchandise from the PX.
2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and informed the applicant of his rights.

3. On 4 March 2004, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested a personal appearance before and an administrative separation board if applicable (not entitled), and submit a statement on his own behalf. 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 of a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

4. On 9 March 2005, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5. The applicant was separated on 19 April 2005, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b (Pattern of Misconduct), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKA and an RE code of 3.

6. The applicants record does not show any time lost.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD:

1. A FG Article 15, dated 10 September 2005, for without authority, absent himself from his place of duty on three occasions (040419 x 2 and 040903) and failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on two occasions (040827 and 040901). His punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2 (suspended), forfeiture of pay in the amount of $312.00 pay per month for one month (suspended), and 14 days of extra duty and restriction.

2. An incident report dated 21 November 2004, from AAFEs store manager.

3. On 29 November 2004, the suspension of punishment of a reduction to E-2 and forfeiture of pay in the amount of $312.00 pay per month for one month was vacated for a new offense of stealing five DVDs and two CDs, of a value of $176.65, the property of AAFES, while in Baghdad, Iraq.

4. There are six negative counseling statements dated between 19 April 2004 and 25 November 2004, failing to report to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time, dereliction of duty, AWOL, stealing from AAFES, and a request for a chapter.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293 and DD Form 214.

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 members 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 Soldiers separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1. The applicants request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining his military records and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge.

2. The applicants 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 repeated incidents of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicants service was marred by an Article 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, a record of supplementary action under Article 15, UCMJ, and several negative counseling statements.

3. 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.

4. The applicant contends that he paid into the GI bill fund for a year and cant receive the benefits due to not having an honorable discharge. However, 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.

5. The record contains no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the applicants command, all requirements of law and regulation were met, and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.

6. Records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.

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

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 29 October 2014 Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify, NA

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA

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) AR20140000529

Page 2 of 5 pages

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

1