IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 18 March 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140002378 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action 1. 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 to be both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. 2. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25 and 26, contain erroneous entries. 3. The Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant’s DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Section II, and b. block 26, separation code changed to JKB. 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 APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT: 1. The applicant requests to upgrade the characterization of his service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable. 2. The applicant states, in pertinent part and in effect, he is incarcerated and upon release, an upgrade would help him with employment. Prior to his arrest in April 1999, he had no disciplinary problems and no negative counseling statements—his service was spotless. He was only 20 years old, immature, and emotionally unstable at the time of his arrest. He has since matured, earned two college technical degrees and five Automotive Service Excellence (ASE) Mechanic Certifications. He was promoted to E-4 with 18 months time in service. He served a tour in Korea, and applied to ranger school. His ASVAB score was 79 and GT was 120. He was a team chief. He volunteered to attend the desert warfare training at NTC and become a combat life saver. He won the BRM award and was at the top of his class at basic training. He served as a squad leader in AIT for his accomplishments on the APFT and obstacle courses. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 3 February 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 7 June 2000 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: Air Defense Battery, 1st Sqdn, 2nd ACR, Fort Polk, LA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 27 March 1997, 4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 10 months, 0 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 10 months, 0 days i. Time Lost: 131 days j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 14S10, Avenger Crewmember m. GT Score: 120 n. Education: GED o. Overseas Service: Korea p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: ASR; OSR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 27 March 1997, for a period of 4 years. He was 18 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED). He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 14S10, Avenger Crewmember. He served in Korea. His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement. He completed 2 years and 10 months of active duty service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 29 March 2000, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-5, AR 635-200, by reason of conviction by civil court, specifically for pleading guilty to the offense of aggravated oral sexual battery in a district court and being sentenced to 10 years hard labor without the benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence, a behavior that is unacceptable and would not be tolerated. 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 29 March 2000, 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 8 May 2000, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of paragraph 14-5, Chapter 14, AR 635-200, for conviction by civil court. 5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 7 June 2000, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ, and an RE code of 3. 6. The applicant's record shows 210 days of time lost due to civilian confinement from 29 January 2000 through the date of his discharge, 7 June 2000. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. The applicant’s available record does not show any evidence of actions under the UCMJ or any negative counseling statements. However, he was separated as a PV2/E-2 and the action that caused his reduction is not contained in the service record. 2. An unauthenticated district court document entitled, “Minutes of Court,” dated 18 February 2000, provides a summary of the court’s motion to increase the bond imposed on the applicant. 3. Memorandum, dated 16 March 2000, subject: Request for Legal Action, indicates the applicant was convicted by a civil court and was serving a 10-year sentence without the possibility of parole. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided none. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant states, in effect, since his incarceration, he earned two technical college degrees and five ASE Mechanic Certifications. 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 member’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. 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 Soldier’s 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 "JKB" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (civil conviction). 5. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKB" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 2. The record confirms 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. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. By the serious incidents of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by his civil court conviction. 3. 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. 4. The applicant contends that he had spotless service and provided numerous accomplishments. The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the serious incident of misconduct or by his civil court conviction for the misconduct. 5. The applicant contends that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. 6. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain employment upon his release from incarceration. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 7. The applicant’s post-service accomplishments outlined in the application were also considered. However, these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. 8. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. However, based on a comprehensive review, the applicant’s record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, separation authority as AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, and block 26, separation code as "JKQ.” The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the discharge by reason of misconduct (conviction by civil court). AR 635-5-1, (Separation Program Designator Codes) and Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier processed for misconduct under the authority of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Section II, will be assigned an SPD Code of JKB. 9. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. However, in light of the administrative error recommend the Board administratively change block 25, separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Section II, and block 26, separation code to JKB, as approved by the separation authority. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 18 March 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? No Counsel/Representative: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: 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: Yes Change Characterization to: No Change Change Reason to: No Change Change Authority for Separation: AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Section II Change RE Code to: NA Grade Restoration to: NA Other: Separation Program Designator (SPD) code to JKB 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) AR20140002378 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1