IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	26 April 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120022586
___________________________________________________________________________

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 characterization of service was too harsh based on the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.  The Board determined the reason for discharge was both 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 an upgrade of his discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was essentially discharged for failing 3 consecutive PT tests.  When his 1SG told him that he was going to be chaptered out he stopped showing up to PT formation because he was young and immature.  He served 13 months in Afghanistan and completed most of his enlistment contract.  He does not want those 3 years to have been wasted because he failed some PT tests.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		6 December 2012					
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			10 May 2011	
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Unsatisfactory Performance, Chapter 13, JHJ, RE-3	
e. Unit of assignment:			HHB, 3rd Battalion, 321st FA Rgt, Fort Bragg, NC	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	13 February 2008, 3 years, 18 weeks	
g. Current Enlistment Service:	3 years, 2 months, 28 days
h. Total Service:			3 years, 2 months, 28 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None	
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	13B10, Cannon Crewmember
m. GT Score:				109
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			Afghanistan (090128 – 100123)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, NDSM, ACM-2 w/ 2 CS, GWOTSM, ASR, 							OSR, NATO MDL, CAB
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 February 2008, for a period of 3 years, and 18 weeks.  He was 17 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He served in Afghanistan, earned an ARCOM and a CAB.  He completed 3 years, 2 months, and 28 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s service record shows that on 30 March 2011, 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 specifically for:

* failing two consecutive record APFTs (110202, 101104)
* failure to report on 10 occasions (100722, 100726, 100805, 101115, 101117, 110118, 110302, 110307, 110308, and 110310)

2.  The unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.  

3.  On 31 March 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement on his behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  The separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  The applicant was not transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group.

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 10 May 2011, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

6.  The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.   Article 15, dated 12 August 2010, without authority failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 3 occasions (100722, 100726, and 100805). The punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and restriction (Summarized).

2.  Article 15, dated 14 December 2010, without authority failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 3 occasions (101022, 101115, and 101117).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-3, forfeiture of $423 (suspended), to be automatically remitted if not vacated (110612), 14 days of extra duty (CG). 

3.  Supplementary Action under Article 15, dated 24 January 2011, without authority, failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (110118).  The previously imposed punishments of reduction to E-3 and forfeiture of $423 pay for one month imposed on (101214) was vacated. 



4.  Article 15, dated 11 April 2011, without authority failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 4 occasions (110302, 110307, 110308, and 110310).  The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $733 per month for 2 months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).
      
5.  Twenty counseling statements dated between 31 January 2010 and 10 March 2011, for failure to report (multiple), failure to obey an order or regulation, Chapter 13 counseling, APFT failure (multiple), monthly performance counseling (multiple), military appearance, safety, military education, initial counseling (duplicated).
      
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

 The applicant provided a DD Form 293, and a DD Form 214. 

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided 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 policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  

2.  After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to honorable.  

3.  At the time of discharge the applicant had completed 3 years, 2 months, and 28 days of a   3 year and 4 month enlistment contract.  Additionally, the command saw fit to award the applicant an ARCOM and CAB for his combat tour of duty.

4.  The applicant contends that he was young and immature and quit going to formations.  However, the record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.
	 
5.  This recommendation is made after full consideration of all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of unsatisfactory performance.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service may now be too harsh and as a result it is inequitable. 

6.  The record shows the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.

7.  In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the 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 fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Record Review 	Date:  26 April 2013		Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

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 Authority for Separation:	N/A
Change RE Code to:		N/A
Grade Restoration to:		N/A
Other:					N/A


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)		AR20120022586



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1