Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2012/06/10 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he was unfairly discharged when all he had done was failed the APFT. His NCOIC was demoted for unknown reasons and he is the one who pushed for his discharge. He admits to his mistakes due to being young and asks for an upgrade of his discharge in order to receive the benefits of the GI Bill to go to school and provide for his family. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: None See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 100209 Discharge Received: Date: 100311 Chapter: 14-12b AR: 635-200 Reason: Pattern of Misconduct RE: SPD: JKA Unit/Location: C Co, 2d Bn, 8th IN Rgt, Fort Carson, CO Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 090523, dereliction of duty by falling to sleep while on guard duty (090513), forfeiture of $326, 14 days of extra duty and restriction (CG) 090120, with intent to deceive made a false statement that he did not have any images of child pornography which was totally false (080726); forfeiture of $699 per month for two months, 45 days of suspended restriction, and 45 days of extra duty (FG) 080819, failed to report two times (080731, 080811), dereliction of duty by bringing a laptop computer to extra duty (080726); reduction to E-1, 14 days of extra duty and restriction (CG) 080718, failed to report two times (080603, 080714); 14 days of extra duty and restriction (SUM) Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 21 Current ENL Date: 071113 Current ENL Term: 4 Years 19 weeks Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 04 Mos, 24 Days ????? Total Service: 02 Yrs, 04 Mos, 24 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 19K10/Armor Crewman GT: 97 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (081101-090821) Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 9 February 2010, 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 pattern of misconduct—for dereliction of duty while on guard shift, making a false statement, failing to report, bringing a laptop computer to the motor pool while serving extra duty, and for viewing suspected child pornography, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 9 February 2010, the applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 16 February 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The record contains a CID Report dated 15 December 2008. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 of this regulation 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 absence 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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of the entire applicant’s military records, and the issues submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The analyst determined that the applicant’s 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. By the repeated incidents of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s service was marred by four Article 15s for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and by numerous negative counseling statements. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. The analyst noted the applicant's issue about his desire to attend school using the GI Bill; however, 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. Further, the applicant contends that his NCOIC is the one that pushed for his discharge; however, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant also contends being young and making mistakes; however, the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 28 August 2012 Location: Chicago, IL Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: A self-authored statement (continuation). VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. IX. Board Decision Board Vote: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) X. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI. Certification Signature Approval Authority: ARCHIE L. DAVIS III Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board BONITA E. TROTMAN Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army Secretary Recorder????? Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20120011263 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 pages