IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 23 May 2012
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110024138
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests correction of her narrative reason for separation and separation code.
2. The applicant states she feels her narrative reason for separation and separation code are incorrect because she believes she met the "24/36-month rule."
3. The applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and a copy of an Education Management Information System printout.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant's records are somewhat incomplete; however, they show she enlisted at Fort Gillem, Georgia, on 23 May 2002. She elected enrollment in the Montgomery BI Bill Act of 1984. The length of her enlistment cannot be determined from the available records; however, the Education Management Information System printout she provided indicates she enlisted for 3 years. She completed training as a food service specialist and was serving in Korea when she was processed for separation.
2. The facts and circumstances surrounding her administrative discharge are not present in the available records; however, her records contain a duly-authenticated DD Form 214 showing she was honorably discharged on 11 December 2004 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 13, due to unsatisfactory performance. She completed 2 years, 6 months, and 19 days of active service. She was assigned a separation code of "JHJ" which applies to separation due to unsatisfactory performance.
3. On 15 October 2010, the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) to change the narrative reason for separation and separation code for her discharge. On 15 June 2011, the ADRB determined that her narrative reason for separation and separation code were correct and voted to deny her request.
4. Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, establishes policy and provides guidance for eliminating enlisted personnel for unsatisfactory performance and who were unsuitable for further military service. An individual may be separated for unsatisfactory performance if it is determined that the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. A discharge under honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate and a separation code of "JHJ" is issued to reflect separation under that paragraph.
5. Department of Veterans Affairs booklet, Federal Benefits for Veterans, states service members can apply for VA educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill after completing 36 continuous months of active duty, or 24 continuous months of active duty if they first signed up for less than 3 years. It also states servicemembers who did not complete the required period of military service may be eligible if discharged, in part, for the convenience of the government with 30 continuous months of service for an obligation of 3 or more years, or 20 continuous months of service for an obligation of less than 3 years.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant's administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations with no indication of any violations of the applicant's rights.
2. Accordingly, the narrative reason for separation and separation code were appropriate under the circumstances.
3. The applicant's contentions and supporting documents have been noted; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief because there is no error or injustice in her case and the Board does not change records simply to qualify individuals for benefits. Accordingly, there is no basis to grant her request for a change in the narrative reason for her discharge or the separation code associated with that discharge.
4. It appears the applicant enlisted for three years, and she completed just over 30 months of continuous service. She appears to have met the broad outlines of the 24/36 month rule. However, Department of Veterans Affairs policy is that servicemembers who did not complete the required period of military service MAY be eligible if discharged for the convenience of the government with 30 continuous months of service for an obligation of 3 or more years. The Department of Defense has no jurisdiction over the Department of Veterans Affairs. Any question she has concerning her entitlement to educational benefits must be raised with the Department of Veterans Affairs.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
____X____ ____X____ ___X_____ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
____________X____________
CHAIRPERSON
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110024138
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110024138
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130014368
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. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldiers separation specifically allows such characterization. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301166
Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.Issue 2: (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain.The Applicant remains eligible...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100023003
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 16 September 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance for failing two consecutive record Army Physical Fitness Tests with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070011955
The applicant requests that the narrative reason and separation code be changed on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with a separation date of 19 May 1988. The applicant states, in effect, that her current DD Form 214 lists the narrative reason as "unsatisfactory performance" and the separation code as "JHJ" which she states is an injustice in that she now believes that her personal conduct and behavior that she exhibited on active duty was the result of...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080015274
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 13 December 1995, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance for her lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100026199
The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of honorable. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicants available military records, the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit a change to the applicant's narrative reason for separation on...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013557
Service of soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance for failure of the Army Physical Fitness Test will be characterized as honorable or general, under honorable conditions. By the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100012672
Applicant Name: ????? The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02308
On 7 Jun 94, she elected to accept separation from the Air Force in lieu of a waiver of discharge processing. They recommended against changing the RE code as there is no error in the applicant’s records. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPPAT advises that DOD records indicate the applicant accepted MGIB enrollment on 12 Mar 93.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017618
Army Regulation 635-200 states, in pertinent part, that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. The SPD code of "JHJ" is the correct code to be assigned to Soldiers separating under chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200. The applicant's general discharge is commensurate with her overall record of military service.