AR20140001751

IN THE CASE OF: Mr.

BOARD DATE: 6 February 2015

CASE NUMBER: AR20140001751
___________________________________________________________________________

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 to upgrade the characterization of his service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable.

2. The applicant states, in pertinent part and in effect, at the time of his discharge, he was in a bad relationship. He has since served six more years, did a tour in Iraq, and received an honorable discharge. His military record has been clean of any disciplinary actions against him. An upgrade of the discharge under current review would allow him to advance his career and education, which would cover a 100 percent of his tuition for the college he is currently attending.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 22 January 2014
b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 4 April 2003
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c, JKQ,
RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: C Co, 2nd Bn, 12th Cavalry Regiment, 2nd Bde, 1st
Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 30 March 2001, 3 years
g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 0 months, 2 days
h. Total Service: 2 years, 0 months, 2 days
i. Time Lost: 3 days
j. Previous Discharges: None
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 19K10, K4 M1 Armor Crewman
m. GT Score: 97
n. Education: GED
o. Overseas Service: None
p. Combat Service: None
q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM; ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: No
s. Performance Ratings: None
t. Counseling Statements: Yes
u. Prior Board Review: No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 March 2001, for a period of 3 years. He was 29 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED). He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 19K10, K4 M1 Armor Crewman. His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement. He completed 2years and 2 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1. The evidence contained in the applicants service record indicates on 6 March 2003, 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 numerous incidents of misconduct.

2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an honorable discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.

3. On 6 March 2003, the applicant waived his right to consult with legal counsel, indicated he understood the impact of the discharge action and submitted 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 with an honorable discharge

4. On 14 March 2003, 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 discharged from the Army on 4 April 2003, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ, and an RE code of 3.

6. The applicant’s record shows a time lost of three days due to being confined by civil authorities during the period 16January 2003 through 18 January 2003.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD:

1. Article 15, dated 5 February 2003, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time (030124). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $257, and 14 days of extra duty and restriction, (CG).

2. Article 15, dated 1 November 2002, for committing an assault (020922). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-2, forfeiture of $619 per month for two months (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty, (FG).

3. Summarized Article 15, dated 10 July 2002, being disrespectful towards an NCO (020710). The punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and 14 days of restriction (suspended).

4. Bar to Reenlistment Certificate, dated 12 December 2002, for receiving a FG Article 15 on 1 November 2002, for assault and receiving a punishment of 45 days of extra duty, a reduction to E-2, and forfeiture of $619 per month for two months.

5. Fourteen negative counseling statements, dated between 6 November 2001 and 23January 2003, for failing to pay child support which resulted in receiving a warrant for his arrest; intentionally leaving trash on the ground; failing to shave prior to formation; failing to inform his chain of command with his point of contact number; being charged with an assault case; attitude and personal conduct continuing to be a problem; purchasing of a high value item; receiving a summarized Article 15 and vacating the punishment involving restriction; failing to wear his seatbelt in POV; having POV inspection deficiencies; leaving his place of duty without authorization; failing to pay off a deposit waiver; and missing movement.

6. DA Form 4187, Personnel Action, dated 19 January 2003, indicates the applicants duty status changed from CCA to PDY, effective 19 January 2003.

7. DA Form 4187, Personnel Action, dated 16 January 2003, indicates the applicants duty status changed from PDY to CCA, effective 16 January 2003.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided none.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

The applicant states, in effect, subsequent to his discharge, he served six more years and did a tour in Iraq, and he has received an honorable discharge. His military record has since been clean of any disciplinary actions against him.

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.

4. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of “JKQ” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (serious offense).

5. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of “JKQ” will be assigned an RE Code of 3.

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, 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 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 pattern and serious incidents of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicants record of service was marred by three Article 15 actions for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and numerous negative counseling statements.

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

4. The applicant contends that he was having family issues, such as being in a bad relationship, which affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.

5. The applicant contends an upgrade would provide him better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities or to obtain veterans benefits. Further, 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.

6. The applicant contends that subsequent to leaving the Army, he has served six more years and a tour in Iraq, and received an honorable discharge. His military record has been clean of any disciplinary actions against him. The applicants post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and in his military record. However, in review of the applicants entire service record during the period under current review and the reasons for the discharge, it appears that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.

7. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.

8. 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: 6 February 2015 Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify, NA

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA

Board Vote:
Character Change: 2 No Change: 3
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) AR20140001751

Page 6 of 6 pages

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

1