IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 July 2013 CASE NUMBER: AR20130004777 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 that his general, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that an upgrade of his discharge would better his opportunities for employment. He contends he made mistakes when he was younger and has learned from them. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 7 March 2013 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 25 October 1999 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14 paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: 58th Maint Co, 7th Trans Bn, Fort Bragg, NC f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 30 June 1998, 3 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 3 months, 26 days h. Total Service: 1 year, 3 months, 26 days i. Time Lost: 1 day (period is not indicated on the DD Form 214) j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-2 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 63G10, Fuel & Elec Sys Rep m. GT Score: 112 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 June 1998, for a period of 3 years. He was 18 years old at the time and a high school graduate. The applicant’s record does not show any significant achievements or acts of valor. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Bragg, NC and completed 1 year, 3 months, and 26 days of active duty service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 24 September 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconduct. Specifically for the following offenses: a. receiving a field grade Article 15 for being absent without leave and larceny of another Soldier's money (990712) b. being counseled on numerous occasions for failure to report 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 28 September 1999, 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. 4. On 4 October 1999, 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 25 October 1999, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for a pattern of misconduct, with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and a RE code of 3. 6. The applicant’s service record indicates 1 day of time lost for being AWOL from 5 April 1999 until his return on 6 April 1999. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Article 15, dated 12 July 1999, for going AWOL for one days (990405-990405), stealing cash from another Soldier of some value greater than $100.00 (990414), and on divers occasions between (990414 and 990430), stealing cash from another Soldier of some value greater than $100.00. The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $480.00 pay per month for two months (suspended) and 45 days of extra duty (FG). 2. Eleven counseling statements dated between 8 January 1999 and 15 June 1999, for failure to report, lost of meal card, violation of quarters, and promotion potential. 3. An MP Report, dated 10 June 1999, that indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for larceny. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided no additional documents. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None provided 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 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 document 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 pattern of 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 Article 15 for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and several 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 contends he made mistakes when he was younger that resulted in his 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. 5. The applicant also contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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: 31 July 2013 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? No Counsel: None 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: No Change Change RE Code to: No Change 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) AR20130004777 Page 2 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1