AR20140000665

IN THE CASE OF: Mr.

BOARD DATE: 14 November 2014

CASE NUMBER: AR20140000665
___________________________________________________________________________

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 from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2. The applicant states, in effect, that he never had any problems in his first five years of service. He received four AAMs, mechanics badge, as well as winning the Soldier of the month award. He was promoted to SGT/E-5 and received a top rating on his NCOER. His issues started within the last six months of service. He was having severe personal problems with his now ex-wife. These issues affected his military career and financial status. Instead of seeking help, he let everything build up and eventually it came crashing down. He is now a single parent and would like the opportunity to have better employment. He has been taking advantage of the Post 9-11 GI Bill already and working towards a certificate in HVAC.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 30 December 2013
b. Discharge received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 16 January 2013
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: B Company, 47th BSB, Fort Bliss, TX
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 7 December 2009, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 year, 1 month, 10 days
h. Total Service: 5 years, 9 months, 17 days
i. Time Lost: None
j. Previous Discharges: DEP (070329-070411),NA RA (070412-091206), HD (Concurrent Service)
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 91D10, Power Generator Equipment Repairer
m. GT Score: NIF
n. Education: HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service: Korea
p. Combat Service: None
q. Decorations/Awards: AAM-4, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR
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 12 April 2007, for a period of three years. He was 20 years old at the time of entry and was a high school graduate. He reenlisted on
7 December 2009, for a period of four years. His record shows he was awarded four AAMs and served in Korea. He was serving at Fort Bliss, TX, when his discharge proceedings were initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1. The applicants record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. The record does not contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) or separation orders; however, he provided a copy of the State Director of Veteran Affairs DD Form 214, which was authenticated by the applicants signature. He was discharged as a PVT/E-1.

2. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, for pattern of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

3. The applicants record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD

1. A successful NCOER covering the period 1 September 2010 through 31 August 2011.

2. A DA Form 1059, dated 25 October 2010, showing the applicant exceeded the course standards for the Warrior Leaders Course.

3. There are no counseling statements or UCMJ actions in the record. However, he was discharged as a PVT/E-1; the action that reduced him in rank is not available in his record.

4. Disqualification of the AGCM, dated 4 November 2012.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, DD Form 214, Personal Growth Center documents.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

None was 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 the applicants record of service, his 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 applicants record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. The applicants record does not contain a properly constituted DD Form 214; however, the applicant provided a copy of the State Director of Veteran Affairs DD Form 214, which was authenticated by his signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the presumption of government regularity shall prevail in the discharge process.

3. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of a pattern of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

4. The applicant contends that he was a good Soldier, received numerous awards and never had any problems in his first five years of service. His issues started within the last six months of service. He was having severe personal problems with his now ex-wife. The applicants contentions were carefully considered; however, it is not possible to determine if these contentions have merit because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence (i.e. discharge packet) sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet this burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record.

5. The applicant has expressed his desire to have better job opportunities. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

6. Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 14 November 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) AR20140000665

Page 5 of 5 pages

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

1