IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	21 March 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130011896
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the examiner’s Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of service and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.  The Board determined the reason for discharge was 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 had family issues requiring him to give half of his pay every month to help his father with his bills to offset his disability income.  His chain of command failed to assist him with his weight issues even though he asked many times.  He was awarded two AAMs for his performance; he was an E-4 holding an E-5 slot in the arms room and without any aid he earned commendable ratings on the Brigade Command Inspection (CI).  Due to his discharge he is unable to attend college to better himself and unable to get a job.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		24 June 2013
b. Discharge received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			8 February 2013
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Physical Standards, Chapter 13, AR 635-200, JHJ 						RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			C Battery, 2-5th Field Artillery, Fort Sill, OK
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:  	28 July 2010, 3 years and 18 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:  	2 years, 6 months, 11 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 6 months, 11 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	13B10, Cannon Crewmember
m. GT Score:				106
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		AAM-3, NDSM, GWOTSM, 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 28 July 2010, for a period of 3 years and 18 weeks.  He was 21 years old at the time and a high school graduate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B10, Cannon Crewmember.  His record does not contain any evidence of combat service; however, he earned three AAMs, and he achieved the rank of SPC/E-4.  He was serving at Fort Sill, OK when his discharge was initiated.


SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s service record shows that on 3 January 2013, 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 multiple consecutive Army Physical Fitness Tests (APFTs) on (120810, 120913, 121001, and 121211).

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

3.  On 9 January 2013, the applicant was afforded the opportunity to consult with legal counsel and waived his right to consult with counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement on his 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.  On 22 January 2013, 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 8 February 2013, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  The record contains a DA Form 705 (Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard), indicated a record test dated 10 August 2012,  a diagnostic test dated 12 September 2012, and two record tests dated 1 October 2012, and 11 December 2012, which the applicant failed all of the PT tests. 

2.  The record shows he received four negative counseling statements dated between              10 August 2012 and 11 December 2012, for failing the APFT, showing no improvement and no desire to improve on his PT test and  no improvement on losing weight or decreasing his body fat percentage.

3.  The record also contains a Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 December 2012, which indicated the applicant was mentally responsible, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate in any administrative proceedings and was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command.



EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an online application.

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 application he submitted, 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 had family issues requiring him to give half of his pay every month to help his father with his bills to offset his disability income.  The record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief from his family issues through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other resources available to all Soldiers.


5.  The applicant further contends his chain of command failed to assist him with his weight issues even though he asked many times.  The record of evidence, a DA Form 4856 (Developmental Counseling Form), dated 11 December 2012, indicated the applicant’s run time increased over five minutes since August, he was recommended for a Chapter 13 separation, shown no improvement and no desire to improve on his PT test and no improvement on losing weight or decreasing his body fat percentage. 

6.  Further, 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 his overall service record. 

7.  The applicant also contends he was awarded two AAMs for his performance; he was an   E-4 holding an E-5 slot in the arms room and without any aid he earned commendable ratings on the Brigade CI.  The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the unsatisfactory performance that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.

8.  The applicant additionally contends that due to his discharge he is unable to attend college and better himself and unable to get a job.  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.

9.  Further, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

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

11.  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:   21 March 2014   Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify:  NA

Counsel:  No

Witness/Observer:  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)		AR20130011896



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1