AR20140002063

IN THE CASE OF: Mr.

BOARD DATE: 9 January 2015

CASE NUMBER: AR20140002063
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, to include his combat service, and as a result, it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it.

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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable.

2. The applicant states, in effect, he is trying to better himself by returning to school; however, he cannot use his GI Bill due to the characterization of service he received. The applicant contends he made one mistake that has overshadowed his three years of service, which includes his combat tour in Iraq.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 29 January 2014
b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 11 March 2010
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter
14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: C Company, 2d Battalion, 18th Infantry, 170th
Infantry Brigade Combat Team, Baumholder, Germany
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 30 January 2009/NIF
g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 1 month, 12 days
h. Total Service: 3 years, 7 months, 4 days
i. Time Lost: None
j. Previous Discharges: DEP, 060607-060807, N/A
RA, 060808-090129, HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B10, Infantryman
m. GT Score: 105
n. Education: HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service: Germany, SWA
p. Combat Service: Iraq (080405-090509)
q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-V, ARCOM-3, PH, AAM, VUA,
AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR,
OSR-2, CIB
r. Administrative Separation Board: N/A
s. Performance Ratings: N/A
t. Counseling Statements: Yes
u. Prior Board Review: No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 August 2006, for a period of 3 years and 17 weeks. He reenlisted in the Regular Army on 30 January 2009, for an unknown period of time. He was 27 years old at the time of reenlistment and a high school graduate. He served in Germany and Iraq. He earned a PH, an ARCOM with valor, three ARCOMs, and completed 3 years, 7 months, and 4 days of active duty service. At the time his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving in Baumholder, Germany.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1. The evidence contained in the applicants service record indicates that on 5 February 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason misconduct (serious offense); specifically, for the following offenses:

a. falsified the signature of a medical doctor (090921); and
b. broke restriction, disrespected an NCO, and disobeyed an NCO (between 091013 and 091112).

2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

3. On 10 February 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and elected not to 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 Chapter 14-12b discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

4. On 22 February 2010, 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 11 March 2010, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, for pattern of misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and a RE code of 3.

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD:

1. Article 15, dated 20 October 2009, with intent to deceive, signed an official record falsifying the signature of Dr. B (090921). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $349.00 per month for one month (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG).

2. Four negative counseling statements dated between 6 October 2009 and 12 November 2009, for malingering, falsifying a government document, lying to an NCO, forging the signature of a medical doctor, disrespect towards a senior NCO, failure to follow instructions, Article 15 proceedings, and violation of restriction.

3. MEDCOM Form 699-R (Mental Status Evaluation), dated 25 November 2009, reflects the applicant had a clear and normal thought process and was mentally responsible.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 28 January 2014, and a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review.

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.

2. After examining the applicants record of service and his military records, there are mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge to honorable for the following reasons:

a. Length and quality of service: The applicant completed his first full term of service enlistment, thus the preponderance of his service was honorable.

b. The record confirms the applicant received several awards, specifically a PH, an ARCOM with valor, and three additional ARCOMs, all of which were for his tour in Iraq.

3. This recommendation is made after full consideration of all of the applicants faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicants characterization of service may now be too harsh and as a result inequitable.

4. In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the discharge is now inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, the reason for the discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 9 January 2015 Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify, No

Counsel: None

Board Vote:
Character Change: 4 No Change: 1
Reason Change: 0 No Change: 5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214: Yes
Change Characterization to: Honorable
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) AR20140002063

Page 6 of 6 pages

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

1