Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/11/26	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, he is requesting an upgrade to his discharge.  He was wrongfully  discharged from his unit due to lack of command support and discrimination.  He started having problems in his unit with depression after a very unfortunate chain of events took place in his family.  When he asked for some extra time he was denied leave because the command didn’t feel like he was working hard enough to deserve it.  He had found out his father has a life threatening brain tumor, his fiancé back home was having a miscarriage and his grandmother was hospitalized after a stroke.  His grandmother meant a lot to him because she was there for him the entire time before his mother passed away.  When he told his SGT  these things and it seemed as if she had no sympathy.  He got really upset with her and went to the 1SG and was counseled for going over her head.  He was given unfair counselings and mistreated by her almost daily.  She tried everything she could to build a packet to get him dishonorably discharged.  He informed the commander and 1SG but they took her side.  He even went to IG after he was given advice from his squad leader.  

He tried everything to include going to JAG, mental health, claiming that he was crazy and telling them about his depression.  He wasn't as mentally messed up as he told some of the doctors but his chain of command was trying their hardest to get me kicked out dishonorably.  He was also given an Article 15 for disobeying a direct order for not doing the 5000 word essay in which he has proof and witness of completing it.  The applicant continued to list the negative and unprofessional issues that he experience in his unit.  Lastly, he contends that he would like an upgrade for better job opportunities, a chance to go to college (GI Bill), and a chance to re-live his dream by serving in the military again.  

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: 110708   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 3rd Battalion, 25th Aviation Regiment, 25 Combat Aviation Brigade, Schofield Barracks, HI  

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  20
Current ENL Date: 080402    Current ENL Term: NIF Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 03 Mos, 07 Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 03 Mos, 07 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: Pattern of Misconduct   GT: NIF   EDU: GED   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (090908-100717)
Decorations/Awards: AGCM, NDSM, ICM-w/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed 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 pattern of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  
       
       Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JKA (i.e., pattern of misconduct) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 3.  On 21 June 2011, Orders 172-0009, DA, HQ, U.S. Army Garrison, Schofield Barracks, HI, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective 8 July 2011. 

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
            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. 

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s available military records, the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge.  
       
       The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his 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 14-12c by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  On 21 June 2011, Orders 172-0009, DA, HQ, U.S. Army Garrison, Schofield Barracks, HI, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective 8 July 2011.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant would have been 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.  There is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service.  Moreover, 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 in this case and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge.  
       
       If a personal appearance hearing is desired, it is the applicant’s responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record.  The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence (i.e., discharge packet) sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration.
       
       The analyst also noted the applicant's issues about his desire to rejoin the Service, to have better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill.  However, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Furthermore, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry (RE) codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  The applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  The analyst found no basis upon which to recommend a change to the applicant’s reentry code.  An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 
       
       Additionally, 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.the applicant's issues about his desire to improve himself through education and receive GI Bill 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.
       
       Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that it appears that 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: 10 April 2013         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293; DD Form 214; a self-authored statement; and three letters of support 

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 Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge to be proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.
        
IX.  Board Decision						
Board Vote:
Character - Change    0    No change    5
Reason -     Change    0    No change    5
(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: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




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




JOSEPH M. BYERS
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder
?????



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	UOTH - Under Other Than Honorable 
												Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20120022246
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages