AR20150009510

IN THE CASE OF:

BOARD DATE: 8 November 2016

DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150009510

BOARD VOTE:

_________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF

________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___x____ ___x____ ___x_____ DENY APPLICATION

2Enclosures
1. Board Determination/Recommendation
2. Evidence and Consideration

IN THE CASE OF:

BOARD DATE: 8 November 2016

DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150009510

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

_____________x____________
CHAIRPERSON

I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

IN THE CASE OF:

BOARD DATE: 8 November 2016

DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150009510

THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge under honorable conditions to honorable.

2. The applicant states he has learned from all of his previous mistakes and desires a second chance to prove himself. He believes everyone can be rehabilitated. He was going through a lot during this time; his marital issues were the primary reasons for his downfall. He went to FortCampbell, trained on the Defense Travel System, and took over a staffsergeant position. He properly handled over 1,500travel vouchers, as well as worked with the S-1 office. He never had a single complaint when it came to his job performance or his work ethic. He often stayed after hours to ensure the job was done and no Soldier was left behind. He made mistakes, as all humans do. The uniform doesn’t preclude one from having flaws.

3. The applicant provides no additional evidence.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 7October 2009 for a period of 6years. He completed training and he was awarded military occupational specialty15P (Aviation Operations Specialist).

2. His records contain General Sessions Court for Montgomery County, Clarksville, TN, Order Granting Bail for Abuse Cases Conditions of Release, dated 9December 2012, which states he was enjoined from threatening to commit or committing any offenses set forth in the warrant against the alleged victim (his wife) or other family or household member. He was prohibited from harassing, annoying, telephoning, contacting, or otherwise communicating with the alleged victim. He was directed to vacate/stay away from the home of the alleged victim and to stay away from any other location where the victim was likely to be. He was prohibited from using or possessing a firearm or other weapon specified by the court except for duty. He was prohibited from possessing or consuming alcohol or controlled substances.

3. His records contain General Sessions Court for Montgomery County, Clarksville, TN, Amended Order Granting Bail for Abuse Cases Conditions of Release, dated 21December 2012, which states he was enjoined from threatening to commit or committing any offenses set forth in the warrant against the alleged victim (his wife) or other family or household member. He was prohibited from using or possessing a firearm or other weapon specified by the court except for military duties. He was prohibited from possessing or consuming alcohol or controlled substances.

4. On 10April 2013, his company commander requested a separation physical in connection with initiation of action to separate him for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of Army Regulation635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter18 (should read chapter13 (Separation for Unsatisfactory Performance)).

5. On 1May 2013, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him under the provisions of Article15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for:

* failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (air assault physical training) on or about 2November 2012
* failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (physical training formation) on or about 22March 2013
* failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (physical training formation) on or about 17September 2012, 16November 2012, 2January 2013, and 3April 2013
* failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (corrective training) on or about 5April 2013

6. His DDForm2648 (Preseparation Counseling Checklist for Active Component, Active Guard Reserve, Active Reserve, Full Time Support, and Reserve Program Administrator Service Members), dated 24April 2013, shows he acknowledged receipt of preseparation counseling and understood the available transition benefits and services.

7. A DAForm268 (Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (Flag)), dated 7May 2013, shows a flag was initiated against him effective 14April 2013 for a commander’s investigation.

8. A DAForm3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 19June 2013, shows he was found fit for duty, including deployment, and cleared for administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation635-200, chapter13.

9. His records show he received written counseling on numerous occasions during the period 16November 2012 through 26June 2013 as indicated:

* 16November 2012 for failing to report for accountability formation on 16November 2012 (this was the third time he was late for formation since September 2012)
* 2January 2013 for leaving his appointed place of duty without appropriate authority
* 22March 2013 for failing to report to his appointed place of duty (morning formation and mandatory training) on 22March 2013
* 3April 2013 for failing to report for duty on 3April 2013 (accountability formation)
* 15April 2013 for an alcohol-related incident on 13April 2013 (violating his condition of release)
* 15April 2013 for failing to report to his appointed place of duty (division police call) on 15April 2013
* 25April 2013 for failing to report for duty on 23April 2013 (accountability formation)
* 26June 2013 for mandatory counseling for involuntary separation under the provisions of Army Regulation635-200, paragraph14-12c (repeated patterns pf misconduct)

10. On 13August 2013, his company commander notified him he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation635-200, paragraph14-12c, for commission of a serious offense. He recommended characterization of his service as general under honorable conditions and he cited the following reasons for the proposed action:

* he violated the conditions of his release order issued by the General Sessions Court for Montgomery County, Clarksville, TN, on 13April 2013 by consuming alcohol
* he failed to report to his appointed place of duty at the correct time on divers occasions between on or about 16November 2012 and 23April 2013
* he left his appointed place of duty without authority on 2January 2013

11. On 13August 2013, he acknowledged receipt of the separation notice, the basis for the contemplated action, and the rights available to him.

12. On 14August 2013, his company commander recommended his separation for commission of a serious offense under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200, paragraph14-12c, and cited the aforementioned reasons for separation. He stated the applicant’s retention was not appropriate because further rehabilitative efforts were unlikely to produce a quality Soldier.

13. On 14August 2013, he waived his right to an attorney and acknowledged he was not entitled to a hearing before an administrative separation board. He further acknowledged he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if he were issued a general discharge under honorable conditions and he could be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws if he were issued a discharge under other than honorable conditions. He understood he could apply to the Army Discharge Review Board or the Army Board for Correction of Military Records for upgrading if he were issued a less than honorable discharge; however, an act of consideration by either board did not imply his discharge would be upgraded.

14. On 19August 2013, his battalion commander recommended his separation with his service characterized as general under honorable conditions.

15. On 21August 2013, the separation authority directed his separation under the provisions of Army Regulation635-200, paragraph14-12c, with his service characterized as general under honorable conditions.

16. His DDForm214 shows he was discharged under honorable conditions (general) for misconduct (serious offense) in the rank of privatefirstclass on 6September 2013 under the provisions of Army Regulation635-200, paragraph14-12c. He completed 4years and 4days of active service during this period. He did not complete his first full term of service.

17. On 17April 2015, the Army Discharge Review Board determined he was properly and equitably discharged and denied his request for a change in the character of and/or reason for his discharge.

REFERENCES:

Army Regulation635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

a. Chapter3 provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.
The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s 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.

b. Chapter14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating personnel for misconduct because of minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion, and absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier’s overall record.

DISCUSSION:

1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge under honorable conditions to honorable. He contends he never had a single complaint when it came to his job performance or his work ethic.

2. The evidence of record clearly shows he received written counseling on eight occasions during the 7-month period from 16November 2012 through 26June 2013 for failing to report to his appointed place of duty and violating the conditions of his court-ordered release. He also received nonjudicial punishment for failing to report to his appointed place of duty on additional occasions.

3. Discharges under the provisions of Army Regulation635-200, chapter14, are normally characterized as under other than honorable conditions. It appears that his command favorably considered his overall record of service in issuing him a general discharge under honorable conditions.

4. The quality of his service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel nor was it otherwise so meritorious that it warranted an honorable discharge.

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//
ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953

Enclosure 1

ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150009510

2

ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Enclosure 1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150009510

4

ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Enclosure 2