IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 26 January 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140018052 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action 1. 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 that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his overall service; the circumstances surrounding his discharge regarding the lengthy process of an Article 15-6 investigation, and the applicant’s requests for an unqualified resignation; transfer to the IRR taking over two years, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. 2. As a result, the Board directed to issue a new discharge order which reflects a change to the characterization of discharge to honorable. 3. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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 to upgrade the characterization of his service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable, and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. 2. The applicant states, in pertinent part and in effect, it is inequitable to characterize his solid multi-year career by a single incident, and in consideration of the numerous mitigating circumstances related to the incident, record of inconsistencies and subjective behavior by a significantly influential officer leading up to and following the incident that led to his discharge; and his post-service and continued positive contributions made to his community. In his self-authored statement, he acknowledges making a mistake which he paid for over the past 15 years as a negative toll on his life, causing embarrassment and limited employment opportunities. However, he continued his solid performance. His resume details his professional skills, education, and experiences. Numerous letters were provided from those who are very familiar with him personally and professionally. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 14 October 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 8 November 1999 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: AR 135-175 e. Unit of assignment: HHD, 317th QM Bn, Lawrence, KS f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 23 June 1992, continued appointment tenure g. Current Enlistment Service: 7 years, 4 months, 16 days (concurrent service) h. Total Service: 9 years, 11 months, 10 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: USAR ROTC (891129-910724) / NA USAR (910725-910912) / NA USAR (910913-920221) / NA (Appointment) IADT (920222-920622) / HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: O-2 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 21B, Engineer m. GT Score: NA n. Education: NIF o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: ARCAM; NDSM; ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: Yes SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The record shows the applicant enlisted in the US Army Reserve as a cadet on 29 November 1989, for a period of 8 years. He received his commission on 13 September 1991, which extended his military obligation for an addition 8 years, effective 1 September 1991. His record indicates a mandatory removal date (MRD) of 1 October 2019. He was 23 years old at the time of entry and a record of civilian education is not available at the time of his entry. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 21B, Engineer. His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement. He completed 9 years, 11 months, and 10 days of reserve and active duty service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The available evidence shows the applicant’s current record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the United States Army Reserve. However, the previous Board review (AR2002069538) provides the following: a. Evidence of record shows that on 21 February 1999, the applicant was notified of involuntary separation action proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 2, AR 135-178, by reason of unsatisfactory participation and acts of personal misconduct. On 28 February 1999, the applicant voluntarily tendered his resignation from the service under the provisions of Chapter 2, AR 135-178, resignation in lieu of involuntary separation, and waived legal counsel, waived a hearing by a board of officers, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit and intermediate commanders recommended approval of separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 16 March 1999, the separation approving authority recommended approval of the resignation in lieu of involuntary separation with issuance of a general, under honorable conditions discharge. b. On 8 November 1999, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 7 years, 4 months, and 16 days of active military service in the period under review and had a total of 9 years, 11 months and 10 days of active military service. 2. The available record indicates that on 7 October 1999, Department of the Army, US Army Reserve Personnel Command, St Louis, MO, Orders D-10-969822, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective 8 November 1999, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Discharge orders described at the preceding paragraph 2. 2. There are no negative counseling statements and actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a self-authored statement; a military photo, dated 26 October 1998; eight photographs depicting his father, his great grandfather, NTC 3rd platoon, the applicant, golden knights, applicant and a SSG at Fort Bragg, certificate of appreciation, and applicant’s college photo; a certificate presented by SGT C; CPT promotion list; list of professional books read; two course transcripts; letter of admission to MBA program, dated 16 April 1998; four letters of character reference/support; resume; police conviction report, dated 4 April 2014; Experian credit report, dated 23 January 2014; DA Form 1059, dated 22 June 92; DD Form 214, dated 22 June 1992; four OERS (930726-940725, 940725-950311, 950716-951015, 951016-061015); Master Degree diploma, dated 16 August 1996; sub-courses completion; DA Form 1059, dated 2 July 1994; certificate of training; AAM; two certificates of achievement; two diploma certificates; memorandum, award of ARCAM, dated 2 August 1996; colored chart, entitled “Incident w-LTC C”; e-mail, dated 27 January 2014; Article 15-6 findings/recommendations; three versions of OER (961017-970408); JA memorandum, dated 22 April 1998, subject: Unqualified Resignation; two applicant’s request for resignation, dated 9 April 1997 and 13 November 1998; DA Form 4651-R, dated 9 April 1997; reassignment orders, dated 9 April 1997; 15-6 investigation proceedings, dated June 1997; timeline of events, dated 28 February 1997; IO appointment memorandum, dated 16 April 1997; two IO MFRs with applicant’s rights warning certificate; and due to numerous additional documents that provides for timeline events, they will be termed as “numerous miscellaneous related notes and documents” and not listed separately. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant states, in effect, he continued his solid performance, as reflected in his resume which details his professional skills, education, and experiences, and by the letters of recommendations. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1. Army Regulation 135-175 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of officers from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), except for officers serving on active duty or active duty training exceeding 90 days. Chapters 2 and 3 provide the basis for involuntary separation of USAR officers. Specific categories include substandard performance of duty, moral or professional dereliction, in the interest of national security, as a result of trial by court martial, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or absence without proper authority from unit training. 2. 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. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. After a careful review of the applicant’s military records for the period of service under review, the issues and documents submitted with the application, it appears that the discharge is now inequitable based on his post-service conduct and the circumstances surrounding his discharge, which provides the basis for a more thorough understanding of his performance during the period of service under review. 2. The record supports a conclusion that the applicant’s discharge is now inequitable based on the following factors: a. overall length and quality of the applicant's service, having served for almost ten years without any actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice or record of any negative counseling statement; b. post service accomplishments as outlined in his submitted evidence; c. his character references and supporting statements; and d. the circumstances surrounding his discharge as validated by the Inspector General’s letter, dated 17 February 1999, regarding the process of an Article 15-6 investigation and the applicant’s requests for an unqualified resignation and transfer to the IRR taking over two years. 3. In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the applicant’s discharge is now inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, the reason for the discharge was proper and equitable. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Personal Appearance Date: 26 January 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Tender Offer Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 5 No Change: 0 Reason Change: 0 No Change: 5 (Board member names available upon request) Board Action Directed: Issue a new Discharge Order: Yes Change Characterization to: Honorable Change Reason to: No Change Change Authority for Separation: No Change Change RE Code to: No Change Grade Restoration to: NA Other: To: ARBA Promulgation Team, Arlington, VA 26 January 2015 The Army Discharge Review Board, under the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553, in the case of the applicant named in page 1, directs the ARBA Promulgation Team, Arlington, VA, to issue a new discharge order to the applicant which reflects the following directed changes: [ x ] Change characterization of discharge to Honorable 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) AR20140018052 Page 2 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1