IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 22 April 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140008096 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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, he has not been in any trouble during the past year. He desires to receive VA benefits. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 2 May 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 14 March 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: HHD, 11th Transportation Battalion, 7th Sustainment Brigade, Fort Story, VA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 7 July 2007, 6 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 5 years, 8 months, 8 days h. Total Service: 7 years, 5 months, 12 days i. Lost time: None j. Previous Discharges: RA (051003-070706)/HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 92G10, Food Service Operations m. GT Score: 91 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia p. Combat Service: Iraq x 2 (060729-071015), (090910-100910) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AGCM-2, NDSM ICM-W/2CS, GWOTSM ASR, OSR-3, MUC r. Administrative Separation Board: Yes s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 October 2005, for a period of 3 years and 22 weeks. He was 19 years old at the time of entry, and a high school graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 92G10, Food Service Operations. He reenlisted on 7 July 2007 for 6 years, and he was 21 years old at the time. His record also shows he served two combat tours, earned several awards including two ARCOMs and two AGCMs; and he achieved the rank of SPC/E-4. He was serving at Fort Story, Virginia, when his discharge was initiated. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates 13 September 2012, 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 charged with assault and battery of his wife and pleading no contest (120528), b. being charged and found guilty of assault and battery of his sister (101229), and c. receiving two CG Articles 15 for false statements and failing to report (120611, 110301). 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 25 September 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and indicated he intended to submit 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 25 September 2012, the applicant again 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 did not submit a statement on his own behalf. 5. On 21 December 2012, the separation authority disapproved the applicant’s conditional waiver request and referred his discharge to an administration separation board. On 23 January 2013, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. 6. On 13 February 2013, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 7. On 21 February 2013, 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 general, under honorable conditions. 8. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 14 March 2013, 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), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and a RE code of 3. 9. The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD 1. A CG Article 15, dated 1 March 2011, for without authority, absenting himself from his unit (101230-110110); and failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (110110); the punishment imposed consisted of a reduction to E-3 (suspended), forfeiture of $455 pay (suspended), and extra duty for 14 days. 2. A CG Article 15, dated 11 June 2012, for with intent to deceive, made false official statements to SGT S between 120507 and 120511, and SGT M (120515); the punishment imposed consisted of a reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $462 pay (suspended), and extra duty for 14 days. 3. He received two negative counseling statements dated 31 May 2012 and 25 June 2012, for being notified of flag action and mandatory class and separation under Chapter 14. 4. Warrant of Arrest, Virginia Beach, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court documents, dated 28 May 2012 and 29 December 2012, indicating the applicant was arrested for assaulting a family member. 5. Richmond Police Department, Richmond, VA, Virginia Uniform Summons documents, both dated 28 June 2012, indicating the applicant was charged with defective equipment, and driving while privilege was suspended. 6. Emergency Protective Order, dated 28 May 2011, showing the applicant was to have no contact with his spouse. 7. Chesterfield County, Virginia, Community Corrections Services, dated 8 July 2011, indicating the applicant successfully completed all conditions as ordered (four pages). 8. The administrative separation board proceedings, dated 13 February 2013, indicating the board recommended the applicant’s discharge with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 9. DA Form (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 3 August 2012, indicating the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293. 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 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 (serious offense), the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by two Articles 15, two negative counseling statements, two arrest warrants, a police citation for traffic offenses, a protective order, and a completion of court ordered conditions. 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 he has not been in any trouble during the past year. The applicant is to be commended for his effort. However; this contention is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. 5. The applicant desires to receive VA benefits. 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. 6. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 7. 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) AR20140008096 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1