AR20140002402

IN THE CASE OF: Mr.

BOARD DATE: 23 January 2015

CASE NUMBER: AR20140002402
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the examiners Discussion and Recommendation that follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicants overall length and quality of his 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 discharge from general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation.

2. The applicant states, in effect, he served his country honorably for almost four years with two deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan; he exemplified what a Soldier was as a leader and became an NCO quickly; he received many awards during his career in the Army including two ARCOMs and four AAMs. He is not making excuses for driving under the influence (DUI), other Soldiers at the time that made the same mistake received help and counseling. He completed more than 999 correspondence course credit hours and received an AGCM, which are not annotated on his DD Form 214.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 3 February 2014
b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 11 May 2010
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: A Co, 201st Brigade Support Battalion, Fort Knox, KY
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 26 March 2009, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 1 month, 16 days
h. Total Service: 3 years, 8 months, 13 days
i. Lost time: None
j. Previous Discharges: RA (060829-090325)/HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 92A20, Automated Logistical Specialist
m. GT Score: 111
n. Education: HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service: Iraq (070509-071128)/Afghanistan (080703-090628)
q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM-2, NDSM, ICM-W/ARRW HD, ACM-W/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, NATO MDL
r. Administrative Separation Board: No
s. Performance Ratings: Yes
t. Counseling Statements: Yes
u. Prior Board Review: No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 August 2006, for a period of 4 years. He was 32 years old at the time of entry and a HS Graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 92A20, Automated Logistical Specialist. He reenlisted on 26 March 2009, for a period of 4 years and he was 35 years old at the time. His record shows he served two combat tours, earned several awards including two ARCOMs and two AAMs; and he achieved the rank of SGT/E-5. He was serving at Fort Knox, KY when his discharge was initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1. The evidence contained in the applicants service record indicates on 13 April 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct (serious offense), for being arrested for driving under the influence (100206).

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 April 2010, the applicant consulted 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. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

4. On 23 April 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 May 2010, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and an RE code of 3.

6. The applicants service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences, time lost or actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD:

1. An Elizabethtown Police Department Uniform Summons, dated 6 February 2010 indicating the applicant was apprehended and cited for driving under the influence.

2. A letter, Provost Marshall, Fort Knox, dated 6 February 2010 indicating the applicant was charged with driving under the influence.

3. The applicant received a negative counseling statement, 6 February 2010, for being flagged for pending adverse action for DUI.

4. A successful NCOER covering the period from 1 December 2008 through 31 August 2009.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an online application (seven pages) and a DD Form 214.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

The applicant did not provide any information with his 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.

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, paragraph 14-12c, for 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 and a change to the narrative reason for separation was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicants record of service, his military records the issues and document submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge or a change to the narrative reason for separation.

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 misconduct (serious offense), the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicants record of service was marred by a police department document, a provost marshal document, and a negative counseling statement.

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 requested a change to his narrative reason for separation. 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, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (serious offense). The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized

5. The applicant contends he served his country honorably for almost four years with two deployments one in Iraq and Afghanistan; he exemplified what a Soldier was as a leader and became an NCO quickly; and he received many awards during his career in the Army including two ARCOMs and four AAMs. The applicants service accomplishments and the quality of his service including his combat service prior to the incident that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to overcome the reason for discharge and the characterization of service granted.

6. The applicant further contends, he is not making excuses for his mistake of driving under the influence (DUI), other Soldiers at the time made the same mistake received help and counseling. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization of service.

7. Further, the method in which another Soldiers case was handled is not relevant to the applicants case. 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 characterization of the applicants discharge is commensurate with his overall service record.

8. The applicant contends, he completed more than 999 correspondence course credit hours and earned an AGCM, which are not annotated on his DD Form 214. AR 635-5, paragraph 2-4(14), states from the ERB/ORB, list formal in-service (full-time attendance) training courses successfully completed during the period of service covered by the DD Form 214, and correspondence course credit hours are not covered under this regulation. Also, regarding the AGCM not being annotated on the DD Form 214 does not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans’ Service Organization.

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

10. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief.

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the examiners Discussion and Recommendation that follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicants overall length and quality of his 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.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 23 January 2015 Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify: NA

Counsel: No

Witness/Observers: NA

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) AR20140002402

Page 7 of 7 pages

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

1