IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 4 September 2013 CASE NUMBER: AR20130005229 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 fully honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that he understands and accepts responsibility for his actions. While he was serving, he tore his anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) twice. After the 1st ACL injury, he was seen a month later. He endured seven months of physical therapy after the surgery and gained 30 lbs while recovering. He lost 20 lbs and had to re-start basic from day one. After he completed his training, he was assigned to Ft. Stewart, GA. While stationed there, he re-tore the ACL and waited 10 months to have it repaired. While waiting to have the surgery, he gained weight, and was late for formation a few times. He did not do remedial PT because he felt as though he could be more useful helping out at the company. He would like his discharge upgraded so he can become an automotive engineer. Lastly, he worked almost two weeks without pay (after his discharge orders were processed) due to the rear detachment commander being on leave. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 14 March 2013 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 22 February 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b JKA, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: Home Detachment Company, 1st Battalion, 64th Armor Regiment, 2d Brigade Combat Team, 3d Infantry Division, Fort Stewart, GA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 25 January 2010, 4 years, 17 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 year, 0 months, 25 days h. Total Service: 3 year, 0 months, 25 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 19K10, M1 Armor Crewman m. GT Score: NIF n. Education: HS graduate 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's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 January 2010 for a period of 4 years and 17 weeks. He was 26 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 Stewart, GA. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES 1. On 28 January 2013, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to process him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, by reason of minor disciplinary infractions, specifically for failing to report to his designated place of duty on 11 occasions (between 120626 and 121031, for which he received an Article 15. 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and informed the applicant of his rights. 3. On 28 January 2013, the applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement on his 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 of a general, under honorable conditions discharge for a pattern of misconduct. 4. On 28 January 2013, the separation authority, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions for a pattern of misconduct.. 5. The applicant was separated on 22 February 2013, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, for a Pattern of Misconduct, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKA and an RE code of 3. 6. The applicant’s record does not show any time lost. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD 1. A Summarized Article 15, dated 14 September 2012, for failing to report (120626 and 120703). His punishment consisted of restriction and extra duty for 14 days. 2. A Bar to reenlistment, dated 2 November 2012. 3. A CG Article 15, dated 3 December 2012, for failing to report (121022, 121023, 121024, 121025, 1121026, 121029, 121030, and 121031). His punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of pay in the amount of $389.00, 14 days of extra duty and 45 days of restriction. 4. Several negative counseling statements covering the period of 2 November 2012 through 5 November 2012, for failures to report. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT A DD Form 293 and a DD Form 214. 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 his military records and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient 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 repeated incidents of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s service was marred by two Articles 15 for multiple 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 his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. 4. The applicant contends that he had issues with his ACL which resulted in two surgeries. The injuries caused him to gain weight and he was late for formation a few times. A review of the commander’s notification letter shows the applicant was discharged due to numerous incidents of failing to report to his appoint place of duty at the proper time and not because of weight issues. The evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts. 5. The applicant contends he would like his discharge upgraded so he can become an automotive engineer. However, eligibility for Veteran's benefits to include medical and 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. 6. In addition, the applicant contends he worked almost two weeks without pay (after his discharge orders were processed) due to the rear detachment commander being on leave. However, the applicant’s stated issue does not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. 7. Records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 8. 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: 5 September 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 RE Code to: No Change Grade Restoration to: NA Change Authority for Separation: No Change 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) AR20130005229 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1