IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 June 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140005382 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the analyst’s Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the Board determined the discharge to be 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 discharge characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he had ongoing issues with his family; his spouse was on drugs and the Department of Social Services (DSS) was taking his kids; he went home to take care of his kids to prevent them from being displaced; and he took it upon himself to do what he thought was right for his children. His command did not care about his family and was not willing to help him when he needed it. He was a good Soldier and never had any problems with his unit. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 21 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 31 August 2005 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, 14-12c JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: HHC, 3rd Soldier Support Battalion, 3rd Infantry Division, Fort Stewart, GA f. Enlistment Date/Term: 21 March 2001, 4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 4 years, 16 days h. Total Service: 14 years, 6 months, 5 days i. Time Lost: 146 days j. Previous Discharges: RA (900928-930823)/HD RA (930824-950125)/HD RA (950126-971023)/HD RA (971024-981202)/HD RA (981203-010320)/HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 92A10, Automated Logistical Specialist m. GT Score: 102 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Korea p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: Yes s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 September 1990, for a period of 2 years and 21 weeks. He was 32 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 92A10, Automated Logistical Specialist. He had several prior periods of reenlistments and his last reenlistment was on 21 March 2001, for a period of 4 years and he was 42 years old. His record also shows he served a tour in Korea, earned an AAM, and he achieved the rank of SGT/E-5. He was serving at Fort Stewart, GA, when his discharge was initiated. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 22 April 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct-commission of a serious offense. Specifically for the following offenses: a. being AWOL for over four months (i.e., 146 days), and b. impersonating an NCO. 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an under other than honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights. 3. On 4 May 2005, 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 him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than honorable and submitted a statement on his own behalf (which is not contained in the available record). The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate and senior commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 4. On 20 June 2005, the separation authority disapproved the applicant’s conditional waiver request and directed an administration separation board be convened. On 27 June 2005, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights 5. On 21 July 2005, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 6. On 17 August 2005, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 7. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 31 August 2005, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and an RE code of 3. 8. The applicant’s record of service indicates 146 days of time lost for being AWOL from 20 January 2004 until his return to the unit on 16 June 2004. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD 1. A FG Article 15, dated 11 April 2005, for wrongfully and willfully impersonating a noncommissioned officer of the Army by publicly wearing the rank of a sergeant on his uniform and showing the ID card of a sergeant (050108); the punishment imposed consisted of a reduction to E-3 and extra duty for 40 days. 2. A FG Article 15, dated 21 October 2004, for being AWOL (040120-040616); the punishment imposed consisted of a reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $900 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. 3. Three successful NCOERs covering the periods January 2001 through November 2003. 4. The record contains four DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), all dated 9 July 2004, shows the applicant’s present for duty, AWOL dropped from the roll dates and the DFR description of the applicant. 5. The administrative separation board proceedings, dated 21 July 2005, indicating the board recommended the applicant’s discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 6. He received several counseling statements dated between 30 August 2004 and 28 January 2005, for being AWOL, an Article 15 appeal, recommendation for separation and indebtedness. 7. A Military Police Report dated 8 July 2004, indicating the applicant was under investigation for deposit account fraud. 8. DA Form (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 3 May 2005, indicating the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative separation deemed appropriate by the command. However, he had a history of experiencing depressive symptoms and given the significant stress associated with his pending separation, it was strongly recommended he continue to receive supportive therapy from DMHA until his separation was complete. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, a DD Form 214 and two DD Forms 215. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any information with 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 his characterization of service was carefully considered. 2. After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the documents and issues submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to general, under honorable conditions for the following reasons: a. Overall length and quality of the applicant’s service: the applicant served 4 years and 16 days of his last contract of four years; at the time of his discharge he had completed 14 years, 6 months, and 5 days of active duty service, thus the preponderance of his service was honorable and the record confirms he received an AGCM. b. Medical circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e., a Mental Status Evaluation, indicating the applicant had a history of experiencing depressive symptoms and it was strongly recommended he continue receiving supportive therapy from DMHA until his separation was completed). 3. This recommendation was made after full consideration of all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh and as a result, it is inequitable. 4. In view of the foregoing, the analyst recommends the Board grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. However, the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the analyst’s Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the Board determined the discharge to be both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 19 June 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 1 No Change: 4 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) AR20140005382 Page 2 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1