IN THE CASE OF: Mr.
BOARD DATE: 7 January 2015
CASE NUMBER: AR20140001896
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.
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 submitted no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the board.
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:
a. Application Receipt Date: 24 January 2014
b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 19 December 2011
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: A Trp, 1st Bn, 32d Cav Rgt, Fort Campbell, KY
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 9 September 2008, 3 years and 17 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 3 months, 11 days
h. Total Service: 3 years, 3 months, 11 days
i. Time Lost: None
j. Previous Discharges: None
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B10, Infantryman
m. GT Score: 96
n. Education: GED
o. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (100426-110421)
q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, ACM-w/CS, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL, CIB
r. Administrative Separation Board: No
s. Performance Ratings: None
t. Counseling Statements: None
u. Prior Board Review: No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 September 2008, for a period of 3 years and 17 weeks. He was 17 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He was serving at Fort Campbell, KY when his discharge was initiated. The record indicates he served a period of combat in Afghanistan; earned several awards to include the ARCOM and CIB; and achieved the rank of SPC/E-4. He completed 3 years, 3 months, and 11 days of active duty service.
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:
1. The evidence contained in the applicants service record indicates on 13 December 2011, 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. under false pretenses he withdrew money from the unit taxi fund fraudulently writing another Soldiers name, then chose to lie to the company First Sergeant when asked about the issue (110904), and
b. failed to make good on his financial responsibilities to his loan holders between (110726 and 111004).
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 13 December 2011, the applicant waived his right to consult with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and did not submit a statement on his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.
4. 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 19 December 2011, 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 an RE code of 3.
6. The applicants record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.
EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD:
1. Article 15, imposed on 27 September 2011, for falsely making the signature of another Soldier to the troop fund roster by removing $32.00 (110904); making a false official statement to his first sergeant (110904), and stealing $32.00 the property of the Troop A Fund (110904). The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-3 (suspended), forfeiture of $495.00 pay (suspended), and extra duty for 14 days (CG).
2. Several negative counseling statements dated between 30 March 2011 and 23 November 2011, for failure to show up at the appointed time, failure to pay a bill on time, knowingly trying to cash a check without sufficient funds in his account, lying to a senior noncommissioned officer, stealing from troop funds, entrapping a fellow Soldier, financial irresponsibility, supplying false information to a noncommissioned officer, debt avoidance, and separation under Chapter 14-12b.
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:
The applicant provided a DD Form 293.
None provided by the applicant.
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 and the document 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 of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicants record of service was marred by an Article 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and several 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. Further, the applicant did not submit any issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the board.
4. 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 applicants discharge is commensurate with her overall service record.
5. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief.
SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:
Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 7 January 2015 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify, NA
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
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) AR20140001896
Page 5 of 5 pages
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)
CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE