IN THE CASE OF:	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:	4 June 2014

      CASE NUMBER:	AR20130015447
___________________________________________________________________________

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 his service to include his combat 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 to upgrade the characterization of his service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable, and to change the narrative reason for his discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his separation was inequitable owing to the stresses of combat, the loss of his brother, his impending divorce, his being physically assaulted, and, medical treatment received for depression.  He states that with the current characterization of service, he is denied VA benefits.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	19 August 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	21 March 2012
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (Minor Infractions), AR 635-200 
			Paragraph 14-12a, JKN, RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	B Btry, 2nd Bn, 11th FA Regiment, Schofield 
			Barracks, HI
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	4 July 2008, 6 years
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	3 years, 8 months, 18 days
	h.	Total Service:	5 years, 9 months, 21 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	RA (060531-080703) / HD
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-4
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	13B10, Cannon Crewmember
	m.	GT Score:	NIF
	n.	Education:	GED
	o.	Overseas Service:	HI, SWA, Korea
	p.	Combat Service:	Iraq (071210-090223)
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	AAM, AGCM; NDSM; ICM-CS; GWOTSM; KDSM 
			ASR; OSR-2
	r.	Administrative Separation Board: 	No
	s.	Performance Ratings:	None
	t.	Counseling Statements:	NIF
	u.	Prior Board Review:	No 

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 31 May 2006, and reenlisted on 4 July 2008, for a period of 6 years.  He was 19 years old and had a high school equivalency (GED).  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B10, Cannon Crewmember.  He served in Iraq. He earned an AAM.  He completed 5 years, 9 months, 21 days of active duty service.



SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s service record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was digitally authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  

2.  The DD Form 214 indicates that on 21 March 2012, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12a, AR 635-200, for misconduct (minor infractions), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKN and a reentry (RE) code of 3.  

3.  The applicant’s available record does not show any recorded actions under the UCMJ, unauthorized absences or time lost.  However, he was separated as a PVT/E-1 and the action that caused his reduction is not contained in the service record.

4.  There are no discharge orders in the applicant’s records.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  The record does not contain any recorded actions under the UCMJ, unauthorized absences or time lost, or any negative counseling statements.

2.  An AAM certificate, dated 18 January 2009, for meritorious service from 10 December 2007 to 9 March 2009.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided DD Form 214 for service under current review; three separate forms of health record (DD Form 2807, pages 2 and 3; DD Form 2808, pages 2 and 3; and DD Form 2697, dated 15 February 2012).

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant provided none.  

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed.  Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.   

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.

4.  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 "JKN" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12a, misconduct (minor infractions).

5.  The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKN" will be assigned an RE Code of 3.

ANALYST’S DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

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

2.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was digitally authenticated by the applicant's signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process.  

3.  The DD Form 214 also indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a by reason of misconduct (minor infractions), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

4.  The applicant's contentions about being unjustly punished by being discharged by a less than tolerant chain of command for circumstances beyond his control, such as dealing with the stresses of combat, his brother’s death, his ex-wife’s affairs, and the effects of several medications were carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service.  Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted or to change the narrative reason for his discharge.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity, and the application contains no documentation or sufficient evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge or to change the narrative reason for his discharge.  

5.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record.

6.  Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief.

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 his service to include his combat 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. 














SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review         Date:  4 June 2014         Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel:  None

Board Vote:
Character Change:  4	No Change:  1
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)		AR20130015447

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1