IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	17 April 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120022552
___________________________________________________________________________

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 discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was told by a CPT (at legal), that he did not have anything in his record to deserve a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was informed by his platoon sergeant that it was the battalion commander’s policy, that if you failed a PT test, you would receive a general discharge.  The CPT informed him that this would be a violation of Army regulation.

He would also like to qualify for the GI bill.  He realizes the rules of the Army, but he had several personal things to happen while he was serving.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		17 December 2012
b. Discharge received:			General, under honorable conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			24 February 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Unsatisfactory Performance, Chapter 13, AR 635-200
e. Unit of assignment:			D Company, 169th Engineer battalion, 1st Brigade						Fort Leonard Wood, MO
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:  	17 May 2010, for 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:  	01 year, 09 months, 08 days
h. Total Service:			01 years, 09 months, 08 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	None
m. GT Score:				NIF
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		None
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes (Provided by the applicant)
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 May 2010, for a period of four years.  He was 22 years old at the time of entry and was a high school graduate.  



SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  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 not authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  

2.  The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, as a result of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  The DD Form 214 shows the Separation Program Designator code JHJ code and a reentry (RE) code of 3. 

3.  The applicant’s record does not show any evidence or actions under the UCMJ or unauthorized absences or time lost.

4.  The applicant was separated on 24 February 2012, under Army Regulation 
635-200, Chapter 13, (Unsatisfactory Performance), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

5.  The record is void of the case separation file detailing the specific reason for discharge; however, the applicant submitted several counseling statements referencing him failing the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) and disrespecting a noncommissioned officer.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

There are no counseling statements or UCMJ actions in the record.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

The applicant provided a DD Form 293; a DD Form 214; six DA Forms 4856, (Counseling Statements); and two DA Form 705s (APFT Scorecards).

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None listed by the applicant.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY  

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.

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 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 specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his 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.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  

3.  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.  Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

4.  The applicant contends that he was informed by a legal officer (CPT) that it was nothing in his record that would prevent him from getting an honorable discharge.  The applicant further contends he was having personal problems.  His contentions were carefully considered; however, the record is void of the case separation documents; therefore, the complete facts and circumstances for the applicant’s discharge are unknown.

5.  The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill.  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.


6.  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., the 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.

7.  Therefore, based on the available evidence, the presumption of government regularity prevails in the discharge process as it appears that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. 

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Record Review 	  Date:   17 April 2013       Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

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 RE Code to: No Change	
Grade Restoration to: NA	
Change Authority for Separation:	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)		AR20120022552



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1