IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 26 June 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140010183 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 characterization of service to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, his discharge is inequitable because it was based on a single incident. He states, prior to the charges he faced in connection with an incident involving his spouse, his conduct was excellent with no negative counseling. He states, he loved the military and wanted to finish his duty. He states, since his discharge, he has consistently worked for Northern Pipe Line with Natural Gas, has no criminal or traffic offenses and a strong credit history. He desires to start his education in business and get his pilot license. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 9 June 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 21 December 2012 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: A Troop, 2nd Squadron, 13th Cavalry Regiment, Fort Bliss, TX f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 4 January 2011/3 years, 19 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 11 months, 18 days h. Total Service: 1 year, 11 months, 18 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 19D10, Cavalry Scout m. GT Score: 109 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Iraq (110726-111112) q. Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR r. Administrative Separation Board: NA s. Performance Ratings: NA t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 January 2011, for a period of 3 years and 19 weeks. He was 22 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He served in Iraq and earned an AAM. He completed 1 year, 11 months, and 18 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Bliss, TX. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The applicant’s service record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant’s signature. 2. However, a Commander’s Report, dated 3 December 2012, submitted by the applicant indicates the unit commander’s specific and factual reason for initiating separation action was due to the applicant making false official statements on divers occasions. 3. The DD Form 214 indicates on 21 December 2012, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKQ and a reentry (RE) code of 3. 4. The applicant’s available record does not show any recorded actions under the UCMJ, unauthorized absences or time lost. However, the applicant submitted two CG Article 15s that reflect on 27 September 2012, he received non-judicial punishment for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: 0530 accountability formation (120920). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-2, forfeiture of $389 pay (suspended) and 14 days of extra duty and restriction (suspended). On 15 November 2012, the applicant received non-judicial punishment for making false official statements (121023). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $347 pay, and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. 5. On 19 December 2012, DA Headquarters, 1st Armored Divisions and Fort Bliss, Fort Bliss, TX, Orders Number 354-0083, discharged the applicant from the Army effective 21 December 2012. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: Discharge Orders Number 354-0083, dated 19 December 2012. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 30 May 2014, a self-authored statement, dated 6 June 2014, a DD Form 214, an Enlisted Record Brief, dated 28 November 2011, an Order of the Combat Spur certificate, a letter from the National Personnel Records Center, dated 9 January 2014, Orders Number 354-0083, dated 19 December 2012, Montgomery GI Bill document, dated 4 January 2011, two DD Forms 93, two SGLI forms, two CG Article 15s, dated 27 September 2012 and 15 November 2012, a mental health discharge order, dated 29 October 2012, a counseling statement, dated 28 November 2012, a commander’s report, dated 3 December 2012, a credit rating, two letters of recommendation, and court document, dated 13 July 2012. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant states, since his discharge he has consistently worked for the Northern Pipe Line with Natural Gas, has no criminal or traffic offenses and a strong credit history. 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 issues and documents submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 2. The applicant’s record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214, which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. 3. The DD Form 214 also indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c by reason of misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 4. 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 his 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 two CG Article 15s and a negative counseling statement. 5. The applicant's contention that his discharge was inequitable based on the incident involving his wife was carefully considered. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. 6. The applicant contends since his discharge from the Army he has consistently worked for the Northern Pipe Line with Natural Gas, has no criminal or traffic offenses and a strong credit history. The applicant’s post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application; however, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. 7. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., complete discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record. 8. Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 26 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) AR20140010183 Page 2 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1