IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 25 February 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140004766 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 characterization to honorable. 2. The applicant did not present any issues of propriety or equity for the Board to consider. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 11 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 8 June 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: HHD, 303rd Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Battalion, Schofield Barracks, HI f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 11 October 2012/Indefinite g. Current Enlistment Service: 7 months, 28 days h. Total Service: 15 years, 2 months, 19 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: ARNG, 980320-981112, NA ADT, 981113-990416, HD, ARNG, 990417-001002, NA RA, 001003-030810, HD RA, 030811-050719, HD RA, 050720-071009, HD RA, 071010-121010, HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-6 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 74D20, Chemical Operations Specialist m. GT Score: 115 n. Education: Associates Degree o. Overseas Service: SWA, Germany, Hawaii, Yugoslavia p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (111129-120601), Iraq (061011- 071205, 040228-050312, and 030204-030812) q. Decorations/Awards: JSCM, ARCOM-4, PH-2, JSAM, MUC, AGCM-4, NDSM, ACM-2CS, OSB-7, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KCM, AFSM, HSM, ICM-CS, NPDR-3, ASR, OSR-3, MOVSM, NATO MDL-2, CAB r. Administrative Separation Board: Yes s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG) on 20 March 1998, for a period of 8 years. He was 21 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He transferred to the Regular Army on 3 October 2000, for a period of 3 years. He reenlisted three times, with his last reenlistment on 11 October 2012, for an indefinite term. He served in Germany, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Yugoslavia and earned a JSCOM, four ARCOMs, two PHs, a JSAM, and a CAB. He completed a total of 15 years, 2 months, 19 days of creditable military service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving in Hawaii. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The applicant’s service record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. 2. The record shows that on 5 April 2013, an administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board findings and recommendations were approved by the separation authority. The decision of the board was not found in the available record. 3. The DD Form 214 indicates that on 8 June 2013, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKQ and a reentry (RE) code of 3. 4. On 3 May 2013, HQDA USA Garrison-Hawaii, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, Orders Number 123-0007, discharged the applicant from the Army effective 8 June 2013. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Discharge Orders Number 123-0007, dated 3 May 2013. 2. Article 15, dated 25 January 2013, for falsifying official documents, to wit: air assault school diploma, airborne course diploma, advanced airborne course diploma, and pathfinder school diploma, and wrongfully and without authority wearing on his uniform the Senior Parachute Badge, Air Assault Badge, and Pathfinder Badge. The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-5, forfeiture of $1,532 per month for two months, 45 days of extra duty and an oral reprimand (FG). 3. AR 15-6 investigation, dated 9 January 2013, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for falsifying records of training and wearing unauthorized awards or badges, to include the Pathfinder and Airborne courses. 4. A NCOER covering the period of 11 April 2012 through 1 May 2013. The applicant received a “Marginal” rating from his rater and a “5/5” rating for his “Overall Performance/Overall Potential” from his senior rater. 5. Article 15, dated 8 August 2011 for violating a no-contact order, engaging in an inappropriate relationship and wrongfully influencing an investigation. The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-5. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 12 February 2014, a DD Form 214, nine NCOERs covering the period of February 2004 through 10 April 2012, Permanent Orders Number 153-019, dated 1 June 2012, two Purple Heart certificates, a JSCM certificate, a JSAM certificate, four ARCOM certificates, a AAM certificate, a AFSM certificate, a GWOTSM certificate, a HSM certificate, a MOVSM certificate, two NATO MDL certificates, Permanent Orders Number 119-1, 140-03, 317-02, and 317-01, three certificates of achievement, a gold Schutzenschnur certificate, and a gold German Armed Forces Badge. 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 issues and documents submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 2. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214, which was authenticated by the applicant's signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. 3. The DD Form 214 also indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c by reason of misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 4. There is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. 5. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record. 6. Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 25 February 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) AR20140004766 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1