IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 22 April 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140008328 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 discharge characterization from general, under honorable conditions to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to receive his GI Bill benefits for education and job placement, and to possibly reenlist in the military. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 12 May 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 9 July 2009 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: A Co, 4th Bn, 23rd IN Rgt, Fort Lewis, WA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 15 November 2006, 3 years and 18 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 5 months, 25 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 5 months, 25 days i. Time Lost: 59 days j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B10, Infantryman m. GT Score: 90 n. Education: GED o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 November 2006, for a period of 3 years and 18 weeks. He was 18 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED). He was serving at Fort Lewis, WA when his separation was initiated. The record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 8 June 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct (serious offense). Specifically for the following offenses: a. wrongfully assaulting A.C.R., by punching her with a closed fist and breaking her jaw in two places 4 October 2008, b. being arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol and consuming alcohol while under the legal age of 21 x 2, 22 December 2007 and 31 August 2008, and c. wrongfully assaulting PFC C., by punching him in the left eye with a closed fist 27 February 2008. 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 8 June 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted 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 18 June 2009, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 9 July 2009, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and an RE code of 3. 6. The applicant’s record of service indicates 59 days of time lost for being confined by civilian authorities x 2, three days from 4 October 2008 until his release on 7 October 2008 and 56 days from 4 February 2009 until his release on 1 April 2009. 7. The applicant’s record does not show any recorded actions under the UCMJ. However, documents in the record indicates the applicant was promoted to PFC/E-3 and he was separated as PV2/E-2, the action that caused his reduction is not contained in the service record. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. A General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 10 April 2008, which indicates the applicant was reprimanded for driving under the influence of alcohol with breathalyzer test result of .151 grams. 2. Four DA Form 4187s (Personnel Action) dated between 4 October 2008 and 14 April 2009, changing the applicant's duty status. 3. Tacoma Police Department Arrest Report for domestic violence (13 pages). 4. Several negative counseling statements dated between 4 June 2007 and 3 May 2009, for loss of his meal card, failure to be at his appointed place of duty, insubordinate conduct toward a noncommissioned officer on several occasions, drunken operation of a vehicle, assault consummated by battery, underage consumption of alcohol, domestic violence, failure to be in the proper uniform, and his confinement by civilian authority resulting from his 8 October 2008 arrest for second degree violence. 5. Mental Status Evaluation, dated 20 November 2008, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate in any administrates proceedings. The applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriated by his command. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None were provide with the 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 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, 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. By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by his acts of misconduct (i.e., assault, underage drinking, driving under the influence of alcohol x 2, a GOMOR, and negative counseling statements). 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 rejoin the Service, to have better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 5. Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. There is no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 6. Further, 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. 7. The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. 8. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 22 April 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) AR20140008328 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1