IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	1 November 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130008384
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the length of the applicant's service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e., the service record does not contain any other derogatory information), 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, he needs an upgrade of his discharge in order to join the police force and continue serving his community; the police force does not accept veterans with less than an honorable discharge.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		29 April 2013
b. Discharge received:			General, under honorable conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			14 October 2009
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Unsatisfactory Performance, Chapter 13 							AR 635-200, JHJ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			C Company, 832nd Ordnance Battalion, Redstone 						Arsenal, AL
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:  	4 February 2009/OAD, 11 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:  	8 months, 11 days
h. Total Service:			3 years, 5 months, 20 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA (010130-010810)/UNC										     (Break in Service)										ARNG-(031223-050922)/UNC									     (Break in Service)										ARNG (080807-090203)/NA									     (Concurrent Service)
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	None
m. GT Score:				121
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM
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 30 January 2001, for a period of 2 years.  He was 18 years old at the time and a high school graduate.  He served for 6 months and 11 days and was discharged for entry level performance and conduct.  The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard on 23 December 2003, for a period of 7 years, 4 months and 29 days. He was 21 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He served 1 year and 9 months; he was discharged on 22 September 2005 for failing to ship to IADT.  The applicant enlisted again in the Army National Guard on 7 August 2008, for a period of 3 years.  He was ordered to Active duty on 4 February 2009, for a period of 11 weeks.  His record does not document any acts of valor or significant achievements.  He was serving at Redstone Arsenal, AL when his discharge was initiated.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s service record shows that on 1 October 2009, 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 Army Physical Fitness Tests (APFTs).

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

3.  On 1 October 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement on his behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  

4.  On 1 October 2009, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 14 October 2009, 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 record contains two DA Forms 705 (Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard), dated      24 February 2009, diagnostic and 14 April 2009, end of cycle, which indicated the applicant failed both tests. 

2.  The record shows he received two negative counseling statements dated between              14 April 2009 and 2 September 2009, for failing the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT), and disrespecting an Army civilian.

3.  The record also contains a Mental Status Evaluation, dated 29 August 2009, which indicated the applicant’s thinking process was clear for separation from the military.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, and a police officer job announcement.
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.

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, the document and the issue 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 his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By his unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of his 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 he needs an upgrade of his discharge in order to join the police force and to continue serving his community; the police force does not accept veterans with less than an honorable discharge.  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:  1 November 2013   Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify:  NA

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  3	No Change:  2
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		Yes
Change Characterization to:	Honorable
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	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions


ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20130008384



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1