IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr.

      BOARD DATE:  	7 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006022
___________________________________________________________________________

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 would like to receive GI Bill and other benefits in order to improve his quality standards of living to include employment, health and dignity.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		25 March 2013
b. Discharge received:			General, under honorable conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			10 January 2003
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Unsatisfactory Performance, AR 635-200, 							Chapter 13, JHJ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			HHD, 330th Movement Control Bn, Fort Bragg, NC
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:  	25 September 2000, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:  	3 years, 3 months, 19 days
h. Total Service:			3 years, 3 months, 19 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	88N10, Traffic Control Management Coordinator
m. GT Score:				100
n. Education:				GED
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		AAM-2, NDSM, 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 22 September 1999, for a period of 4 years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED).  The applicant’s record indicates he received 2 AAMs.  When his discharge proceeding was initiated, he was serving at Fort Bragg, NC.
 
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The applicant’s service record shows that on 31 October 2002, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, paragraph 13-2, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance; specifically for failing two consecutive Army Physical Fitness Tests (020516, 021025).

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

3.  On 18 November 2002, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and indicated he would submit a statement on his behalf (NIF).  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with an honorable discharge.  

4.  On 13 December 2002, 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 US Army Reserve Control Group.

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 10 January 2003, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions, under the provisions of Chapter 13, with an SPD code of JHJ and a reentry code of 3.

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  A Company Grade Article 15 imposed on 11 September 2002, for four instances of failure to report to his designated place of duty (between 020724 and 0020731); being disrespectful in language to an NCO (020724).  His punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-3, forfeiture of pay in the amount of $323.00 (suspended), and 14 days of extra duty.

2.  The record contains 8 negative counseling statements dated between 7 February 2002 and 27 September 2002 for incidents related to APFT failure and initiation of Chapter proceedings for unsatisfactory performance.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

 The applicant provided a DD Form 214 with his application.

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.

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 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 the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his 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 his service below that meriting an honorable characterization of service.  The applicant’s service was marred by a CG Article 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and multiple negative counseling statements.

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 that he would like to receive GI Bill and other benefits in order to improve his quality standards of living to include employment, health and dignity.  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.  Moreover, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

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

6.  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:  7 October 2013     Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA

Board Vote:
Character  	Change:  1	No Change:  4
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:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
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	UOTH - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR 20130006022		

Page 5 of 5 pages



ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1