IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	18 December 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130010098
___________________________________________________________________________

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 and reentry code for his discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was discharged because he was unable to secure a secret clearance.  He contends he qualified for other military occupational specialty (MOS) in which he could have been reclassified, however instead he was discharged.  His DD 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) indicates the narrative reason as “Unsatisfactory Performance.”  He states based on letters of support submitted with his application, the quality of his military service was never in question.  He has 13 years of total military service and would like to continue to serve his country in the Army National Guard.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			28 May 2013
b. Discharge Received:			Honorable
c. Date of Discharge:				19 March 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Unsatisfactory Performance, AR 635-200,
Chapter 13, JHJ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:				HSC, HHB, APO AP
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		8 July 2010/4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:		1 year, 8 months, 12 days
h. Total Service:				13 years, 7 months
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			DEP,(830124-831005), NA
RA, (831006-861005), NA
USAR (861006-890110), NA
RA, (890111-890811), NA
BREAK, (890812-050308), NA
ARNG, (050309-090525), NA
RA, (090526-090930), HD
ARNG, (050309-100707), HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-6
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		27D20, Paralegal Specialist
m. GT Score:					102
n. Education:					One year college
o. Overseas Service:				Korea
p. Combat Service:				None
q. Decorations/Awards:			NDSM, GWOTEM, KDSM, ASR
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 9 July 2010 for a period of 4 years.  He was 45 years old at the time of entry and completed one year of college.  He served in Korea.  His record is void of any significant acts of valor or achievement.  He completed 13 year, and 7 months of creditable military service.  When discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving in Korea.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 1 February 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance.  Specifically for being denied access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) and other controlled access program information resulting in the inability to obtain a security clearance.

2.  Based on the above, the commander recommended an honorable discharge.

3.  On 3 February 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  

4.  On an unknown date, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service as honorable.  

5.  The applicant was separated on 19 March 2012, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, with an honorable discharge, an SPD code of JHJ, and an RE code of 3.

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

A counseling statement, dated 20 January 2012, informing the applicant of the command’s intent to process him for separation from the military under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

 The applicant provided:

     a.  A DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552), dated 20 May 2013. 

     b.  A self-authored statement, dated 20 May 2013.
     c.  Five letters of support from SGM T, SFC B, MAJ W, Mr. C, COL C, stating, in effect, the applicant was a hard working and conscientious NCO who worked well with his fellow NCOs and mentored younger Soldiers in the unit.  His character was never in question and his professionalism and military bearing were always in keeping with those expected of a NCO.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any in support of his 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 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.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

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

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

4.  The applicant contends that he had good service and provided letters of support to confirm his performance.  The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incident that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an narrative reason change to the discharge because the applicant was in a military occupational specialty (MOS) that required him to obtain and hold a security clearance.

5.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous.

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

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

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Record Review    Date:  18 December 2013       Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel:  yes [redacted]

Witnesses/Observers:  None 

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:	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)		AR20130010098



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1