IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	11 September 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130005728
___________________________________________________________________________

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 a change to the narrative reason for separation.

2.  He states, in effect, he was never in any trouble or received any disciplinary action during his time in service.  He was discharged due to family hardship.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		25 March 2013
b. Discharge received:			Honorable
c. Date of Discharge:			13 July 2011
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Unsatisfactory Performance, Chapter 13, JHJ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			HHC, Combat Aviation Brigade (Rear) (Provisional)						Fort Hood, TX
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:  	7 April 2010, 3 years and 19 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:  	1 year, 3 months, 7 days
h. Total Service:			1 year, 3 months, 7 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	11B10, Infantryman
m. GT Score:				97
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Afghanistan (101010-110121)
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, ACM-W/CS, ASR, NATO MDL
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		No
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 April 2010, for a period of 3 years and 19 weeks.  He was 19 years old at the time of entry and was a high school graduate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B10, Infantryman.  His record shows he served a combat tour; however, the applicant’s record does not document any acts of valor or significant achievements.  He was serving at Hood, TX when his discharge was initiated

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s service record shows that on 25 May 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 the following offenses:

     a.  being counseled regarding his weapon unsecured while in Afghanistan (101201) 

     b.  disobeying orders, not maintaining his area and failing to perform his duties as a Soldier in the Force Protection Cell

     c.  being counseled regarding his return from down range due to emotional and behavioral symptoms in response to military stressors (110510)

     d.  since being on rear detachment his performance has been poor and progression in the Army is unlikely

2.  The unit commander recommended an honorable discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.  

3.  On 20 February 2008, the applicant waived legal counsel (even though he consulted with legal counsel), was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service of no less favorable than honorable (although the applicant was not entitled to a board) and did not submit a statement on his behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate and senior commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

4.  On 24 June 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of honorable.  The applicant was not transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group.

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 13 July 2011, with a characterization of service of honorable.

6.  The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences, time lost or any actions under Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  The record contains a Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 16 May 2011, which indicated the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder.

2.  He received two negative counseling statements dated 10 December 2010 and 10 May 2011, for failing to obey the orders from a NCO, failing to perform duties, failing to report and unsatisfactory performance.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 149. 

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any with the application.

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.

3.  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, unsatisfactory performance.

4.  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.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for a change to the narrative reason for separation was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit a change to the narrative reason for separation.  

2.  The applicant requested a change to the narrative reason for separation.  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 performance.

3.  Further, Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JHJ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3.

4.  The applicant contends he was never in any trouble or received any disciplinary action during his time in service.  However, the service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline.

5.  The applicant further contends he was discharged due to family hardship.  The applicant bears the burden of presenting credible evidence to support this contention.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention his discharge was due to family hardship.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance.

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

7.  Therefore, the narrative reason for separation being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. 

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Record Review      Date:  11 September 2013        Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify:  No

Counsel:  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 Authority for Separation:		No Change
Change RE Code to:			No Change
Grade Restoration to:			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)		AR20130005728



Page 2 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1