IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 21 January 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140002159 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he would like an upgrade of his discharge in order to have access to better job opportunities and education. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 28 January 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 18 September 2012 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: 2d Battalion, 16th Infantry Regiment (Rear) (Provisional), 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team (Rear) (Provisional), 2d Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division, Fort Riley, Kansas f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 11 November 2009/4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 10 months, 8 days h. Total Service: 5 years, 1 month, 5 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: DEP, 070108-070813, N/A RA, 070814-091110, HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B10, Infantryman m. GT Score: 98 n. Education: GED o. Overseas Service: SWA, Korea p. Combat Service: Iraq (090901-100522) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM-4, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ICM-CS, NPDR, ASR, OSR-2 r. Administrative Separation Board: N/A s. Performance Ratings: No t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 August 2007, for a period of 3 years and 20 weeks. He reenlisted in the Regular Army on 11 November 2009, for four years. He was 24 years old at the time of reenlistment and had a GED certificate. He served in Korea and Iraq. He earned an ARCOM and four AAM’s and completed 5 years, 1 month, and 5 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Riley, Kansas. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 30 August 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, by reason misconduct (serious offense). Specifically for the following offenses: a. failing to obey a lawful order by engaging in a wrongful relationship with several junior enlisted Soldiers (120302) b. violated Kansas Statute 21-3610 by wrongfully furnishing alcohol to minors (120302) c. failed to go to ASAP appointments (120605-120612) d. failed to report to 0630 accountability formation (120621) 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 4 September 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and elected not to submit 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 12 September 2012, 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 18 September 2012, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, for misconduct (serious offense), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and an RE code of 3. 6. The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. An Article 15, dated 16 March 2012, for failing to obey a lawful general regulation by having engaged in a wrongful relationship with several junior enlisted Soldiers (120302) and unlawfully furnished alcoholic liquor to a minor under 21 years of age (120302). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-4, forfeiture of $1,133.00 pay per month for two months, forfeiture in excess of $1,133.00 pay per month for one month (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and restriction, and a written reprimand (FG). 2. Three negative counseling statements dated between 11 April 2012 and 21 June 2012, for missing multiple appointments and formation. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 18 January 2014, and a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review. 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, 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 of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by an Article 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and three 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 obtain 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. 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. 5. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 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: 21 January 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) AR20140002159 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1