IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 9 January 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140002805 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action 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 was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. 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 an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to fully honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he is requesting an upgrade of his discharge for job and schooling purposes. The applicant did not present any issues of equity or propriety for the Board to consider. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 7 February 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 11 May 2012 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct, (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: B Company, 2-505th Parachute Infantry Regiment, Fort Bragg, NC f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 7 June 2011/3 years, 16 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 11 months, 5 days h. Total Service: 11 months, 5 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-2 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B1P, Infantryman m. GT Score: 95 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: NA t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 June 2011, for a period of 3 years and 16 weeks. He was 20 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. His record is void of any significant acts of valor and achievement. He completed 11 months, and 5 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Bragg, NC. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. On 5 January 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, for misconduct (serious offense). Specifically for a. assaulting PVT M by striking at him with his fist in the face on 5 February 2012, b. making a false official statement to SGT N on 6 February 2012, and c. disobeying a lawful order to bring his bags and gear outside with the rest of the platoon on 19 March 2012. 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 1 May 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions and elected to submit a statement on his behalf (NIF). 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 the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 4. On an unknown date, the separation authority directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 5. The applicant was separated on 11 May 2012, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKQ, and an RE code of 3. 6. The applicant’s record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: Commander’s Report reflects the applicant received an Article 15 on 12 March 2012, for assaulting PVT M. The punishment consisted of 14 days extra duty (CG) and an Article 15 on 12 April 2012, for disobeying a lawful order x 2. The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $745 pay per month for two months, $745 suspended, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG). EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 6 February 2014, a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs, dated 21 January 2013, and two DD Forms 214. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any in support of 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 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. 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, the documents 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. The applicant’s misconduct diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by two Articles 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. 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 has expressed his desire to have better job opportunities and the use of his educational benefits through the GI Bill. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities or obtaining eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill. This does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board; therefore, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 5. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 6. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 9 January 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: 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: No Change Characterization to: No Change 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) AR20140002805 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1