Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/12/01	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that it is his understanding that a General Discharge under Honorable conditions for a minor offense will not be considered willfull and persistent misconduct if service was otherwise honest, faithful and meritorious.  His 11 years of service had been honest and faithful, and in this situation it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions.  Characterization of service as General (under honorable conditions) was granted for none support of family; however, he did not know the location of the family at the time.  He has since located them and paid all child support.  His discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 11 years of service with no other adverse action.  He is proud of his time in the service. 

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 980313   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: A Battery 2-8 FA Battalion, Fort Lewis, Washington 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 970923, failure to report to duty (970825); forfeiture of $404.00 for one month, suspended until 23 September 1997, extra duty for 14 days, restriction for 14 days (CG). 

980226, willfully failed to provide any type of proof that he was meeting his commitment of providing financial support to his wife and son (971027); reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $717.00 pay for two months, suspended until 980825, extra duty for 45 days, suspended until 980825 (FG).

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  34
Current ENL Date: 970124/Reenlistment    Current ENL Term: 04 Years  00
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 01 Mos, 20 Days ?????
Total Service:  		11 Yrs, 05 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 861014-920430/HD; RA 920501-930921/HD; RA 930922-970123/HD
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B20/Cannon Crewmember   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA, Korea   Combat: SWA (900823-910321)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM-4, AGCM, NDSM, SWASM, KLM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR, 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.



VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  
       
       The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 
       
       Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JKA with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3."   

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 of this regulation 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 absence 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.   

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s available military records, the issue and document submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge.  
       
       The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the former Soldier’s discharge from the Army.  However, the applicant’s record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  
       
       The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       
       The applicant's contentions were carefully considered.  However, the analyst is unable to determine whether these contentions have merit because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown.  The burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity in this case and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will still be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record.
       
       The applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 11 years of service with no other adverse action.  However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence or documentation to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged.  In fact, the applicant’s two Articles 15 under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and negative evaluation report justify a pattern of misconduct.  The applicant’s statement alone does not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.  
       
             Furthermore, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       
       Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 15 June 2012         Location: Washington D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated 25 November 2011, and a DD Form 214

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. 





























 
        
IX.  Board Decision						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 1    No change 4
Reason -     Change 1    No change 4
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: 
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: ?????

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




ARCHIE L. DAVIS III
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder



















Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20110023960
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 4 pages