IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	12 April 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120022604
___________________________________________________________________________

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 when he enlisted, he did not realize the importance of the Army values.  He was only 17 when he first joined and did not understand the importance of being on time and listening to supervisors.  Now that he is older, he realizes that his actions were unacceptable.  He has been out for two years and realizes that the skills and traits that were taught in the military are for everyday life.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		14 December 2012
b. Discharge received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			23 November 2010
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), Chapter 14-12c, JKQ, 						RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			47th CSB, 2nd Brigade, 1st Armor Division, APO AE 						09034 
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	6 April 2009, NIF		
g. Current Enlistment Service:	01 year, 07 months, 18 days
h. Total Service:			04 years, 04 months, 18 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA (060706-090405) HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		NIF
l.  Military Occupational Specialty:	92F10/Petroleum Supply Specialist
m. GT Score:				NIF
n. Education:				GED
o. Overseas Service:			Germany
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (080405-090527)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, NDSM, ICM-w/CS-2, GWOTSM, ASR, 						OSR-2
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		None
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 July 2006, for a period of three years and 22 weeks and received an honorable discharge for that period of service.  However, according to his DD Form 214, on 6 April 2009, he reenlisted for an unspecified term of service; he was 20 years old at the time.  The reenlistment contract is not in the record.  The applicant served in Iraq and earned an ARCOM.

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.  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.  He was discharged as a PFC/E-3.

2.  The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct, (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  The DD Form 214 shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKQ and a reentry (RE) code of 3.  

3.  The applicant’s available record does not reflect any lost time.  There is no record of any UCMJ action, although the applicant was discharged as a PFC/E-3.  The action that reduced him in rank is not in his record.

4.  The applicant record does not contain any separation orders.    

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

None

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

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

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided with the application.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY  

1. 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.   

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 record of service, his available 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 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.  

3.  The DD Form 214 also indicates the applicant was discharged on 23 November 2010,  under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c by reason of misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

4.  The applicant also requested an upgrade of his discharge based on the fact that he has been out for two years and realizes what he was taught in the military is for everyday life.
However, the US Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to upgrade a discharge based on time elapsed since the discharge.  Each case is decided on its own merits based on all factors contained in the official record or as submitted by the applicant.  Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.

5.  The applicant expresses he was only 17 when he first joined and did not understand the importance of being on time and listening to supervisors.  The applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

6.  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.

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

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Record Review	Date:   12 April 2013      Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

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:	N/A
Grade Restoration to:	N/A
Change Authority for 	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)		AR20120022604



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1