IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms 

      BOARD DATE:  	10 May 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120022892
___________________________________________________________________________

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 her discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable, change her reason for separation, and change her reenlistment code to RE 1.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she would like to be fully eligible to rejoin the Armed Forces in 2013 as an Animal Care Specialist.  She was separated with a Chapter 13 unsuitability/unsatisfactory performance discharge.  The evidence used in support of the decision came from her Field Grade Article 15; as well as a string of inequitable accusations leading to her receiving an improper discharge from the military.  She received a Field Grade Article 15 because she did not cancel her 8 am doctor’s appointment to go to the range.  She had informed her NCO about the appointment two weeks in advance.  She received a phone call from a SGT demanding she cancel her appointment.  The next day she was yelled at in front of the unit.  He decided to escalate matters by calling the Military Police on her as she was pleading with him in tears to let her go to her doctor’s appointment.  When an arrest did not occur, the SGT decided to place matters in front of the battalion LTC and CSM.

3.  Her discharge is inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 11 months of honorable service with no other adverse action.  The circumstances linked to her Article 
15 were overruled by the LTC and CSM.  When she was read her chapter packet, she was told she would get an honorable discharge.  She was called back later and the commander changed the discharge to general, under honorable conditions.  She contends another Soldier was discharged for the same reason and received an honorable characterization.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		10 December 2012
b. Discharge received:			General, under honorable conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			25 February 2011
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:	           Unsatisfactory Performance, Chapter 13, JHJ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			218th Medical Detachment (VS), 56th Multi-							Functional Medical Battalion, Joint Base-Lewis 							McChord, WA	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:  	2 March 2010, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:  	00 years, 11 months, 24 days
h. Total Service:			00 years, 11 months, 24 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	68T10/Animal Care Specialist
m. GT Score:				113
n. Education:				College Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
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 2 March 2010, for a period of four years.  She was 27 years old at the time of entry and a college graduate.  The applicant’s record does not document any acts of valor or significant achievements.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The applicant’s service record shows that on 17 December 2010, 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:

* showing a lack of suitability for military service
* was insubordinate on multiple occasions
* was reluctant or refused to train
* lacked motivation to improve her abilities
* showed a lack of personal accountability

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

3.  On 22 December 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement on her 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 25 February 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.  The applicant received a Field Grade Article 15, dated 2 October 2010, for being disrespectful in language towards a NCO and disobeying a direct order from an NCO (100920), her punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-3, suspended, extra duty for 14 days, restriction for 30 days, and an oral reprimand.  

2.  Thirteen negative counseling statements, dated 20 September 2010 through 16 December 2010, for failure to obey direct orders, disrespectful in deportment towards an NCO, malingering, failing to go, changing appointments without permission, not wearing the proper attire, notification of being “flagged,” and failing to follow instructions.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

The applicant provided an online DD Form 293; a DD Form 214; SSG L’s rebuttal statement; copy of a Field Grade Article 15; counseling statements; Case Separation Documents; copy of a Police Report; a medical document; and an Equal Opportunity Complaint.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided.

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.



4.  The applicant contends that a change in the reason for the discharge and her reentry code would allow for her reenlistment.  However, Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  It identifies the SPD code of "JHJ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory peformance.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  

5.  Further, the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JHJ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3.  There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE 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. 

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, her military records and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The record confirms that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of her service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting an honorable characterization of service.  

3.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  

4.  The applicant contends she was unfairly discharged because she was initially told she was going to receive an honorable discharge and another Soldier being discharged for the same reason received an honorable characterization.  However, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with her overall service record.  Further, the method in which another Soldier’s case was handled is not relevant to the applicant’s case.  Applicable regulations state that each case must be decided on an individual basis considering the unique facts and circumstances of that particular case.

5.  The applicant also contends the incident that caused her discharge was the only one in her entire Army career.  Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  

6.  Furthermore, the applicant requested a change to the reentry code (RE) in order to rejoin the Service.  However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on AR 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE 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. 

7.  Lastly, the applicant states the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed due to the conditions surrounding her discharge.  However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unsatisfactory Performance," and the separation code is "JHJ."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block
 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  

8.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

9.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. 















SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review      Date:  10 May 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:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Other					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)		AR20120022892



Page 7 of 7 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1