IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 June 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140008537 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 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 educational benefits. The applicant contends he went into the military to better his life and serve his country. He returned from deployment and all he wanted was to go home on leave; a month went by and he kept getting the run around while everyone he knew had time off. He was stressed beyond belief and was at the end of his term and believed he worked hard at everything he had to do in the military. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 13 May 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 21 November 2007 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: E Co, 4th Bn, 4th ARB, CAB, 4th IN Div, Fort Hood, TX f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 3 May 2004, 4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 5 months, 27 days h. Total Service: 3 years, 5 months, 27 days i. Time Lost: 22 days j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 92G10, Food Service Operations m. GT Score: 108 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia p. Combat Service: Iraq (051209-061116) q. Decorations/Awards: ICM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR 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 3 May 2004, for a period of 4 years. He was 21 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He was serving at Fort Hood, TX when his discharge was initiated. His record shows he served in Iraq and achieved the rank of SPC/E-4; however, it 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 on 10 October 2007, 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 a pattern of misconduct. Specifically for the following offenses: a. numerous failures to report, b. making false statements, c. numerous incidents of disrespect to noncommissioned officers, d. disobeying a noncommissioned officer, and e. failing to provide support for his dependents. 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 13 October 2007, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and indicated his intentions to submit a statement on his own behalf which was not found in the available record. 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 8 November 2007, 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 21 November 2007, 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 an RE code of 3. 6. The applicant’s record of service indicates 22 days of time lost; two days for going AWOL from 29 October 2007 until his return on 31 October 2007 and 20 days for going AWOL from 2 November 2007 until his return on 22 November 2007. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Article 15, imposed on 11 July 2006, for making a false official statement (060622). The punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $713.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), and extra duty for 45 days (FG). 2. Article 15, imposed on 20 March 2007, for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (070215). The punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $340.00 and extra duty for 14 days (CG). 3. Article 15, imposed on 10 May 2007, for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 2 (070326 and 070405). The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $303.00 per month for one month (suspended), and extra duty for 14 days (CG). 4. A Record of Supplementary Action under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 23 July 2007, which vacates the suspension of punishment of forfeiture of $303.00 pay per month for one month imposed on 10 May 2007, for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (070712). 5. Article 15, imposed on 30 July 2007, for disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer (070711), being disrespectful in language towards a noncommissioned officer x 3 (x 2 070711 and 070713), failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (070712), and being disrespectful in deportment towards a noncommissioned officer (070711). The punishment consisted of extra duty for 14 days (CG). 6. Three DA Form 4187s (Personnel Action) dated between 30 October 2007 and 5 November 2007, changing the applicant's duty status. 7. Several negative counseling statements dated between 25 April 2006 and 13 July 2007, for not being in the proper uniform and at his appointed place of duty, failure to report on numerous occasions, the understanding of general orders, disrespect towards a noncommissioned officer, discussion of substandard performance, failure to provide support to dependents, making a false official statement, and disrespect to a noncommissioned. There were also counseling statements that made reference to the applicant's monthly performance. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided an online application, dated 13 May 2014. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None was 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, 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 of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by four Article 15s for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (to include two periods of AWOL) 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 his misconduct was the result of wanting to go on leave and being given the run around. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. 5. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to receive educational benefits. However, 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 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. 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: 5 June 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) AR20140008537 Page 2 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1