IN THE CASE OF: Ms.
BOARD DATE: 14 November 2014
CASE NUMBER: AR20140000636
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.
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 APPLICANTS REQUEST AND STATEMENT:
1. The applicant requests an upgrade of her discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation.
2. The applicant states, in effect, she was never in trouble for anything and that should be reflected in block 28 on the DD Form 214, no pattern of misconduct.
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:
a. Application Receipt Date: 2 January 2014
b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 19 July 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Pattern of Misconduct , AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: 60th ODMOD Ammunition Ordnance, Fort Carson, CO
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 22 November 2010, 4 years/with a moral waiver (101019)
g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 7 months, 28 days
h. Total Service: 1 year, 7 months, 28 days
i. Time Lost: None
j. Previous Discharges: None
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 89B10, Ammunition Specialist
m. GT Score: NIF
n. Education: HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service: None
p. Combat Service: None
q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: No
s. Performance Ratings: No
t. Counseling Statements: NIF
u. Prior Board Review: No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 November 2010, for a period of 4 years. She was 19 years old at the time of entry and a HS Graduate. She was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 89B10, Ammunition Specialist. Her record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements; she achieved the rank of PFC/E-3. She was serving at Fort Carson, CO, when her discharge was initiated.
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:
1. The applicants service record is void of the complete 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 authenticated by the applicant’s digital signature.
2. The DD Form 214 indicates that on 19 July 2012, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for a pattern of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKA and a reentry (RE) code of 3.
3. The applicants service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences, time lost or any actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
4. On 12 July 2012, DA, US Army Installation Management Command, HQS, US Army Garrison, Fort Carson, Fort Carson, CO, Orders Number 194-0015, discharged the applicant from the Army effective 19 July 2012.
EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD:
1. Discharge Orders number 194-0015, dated 12 July 2012.
2. A DD Form 214, dated 19 July 2012.
3. Enlistment/Reenlistment document dated 22 November 2010.
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:
The applicant provided a DD Form 293 and a DD Form 214.
The applicant did not provide any information with his application.
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 members 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 Soldiers 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 “JKA” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, patter of misconduct.
5. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of “JKA” will be assigned an RE Code of 3.
ANALYSTS DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:
1. The applicants request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge and a change to the narrative reason for separation was carefully considered. However, after examining her available military records, the issue and document submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge or a change to the narrative reason for separation.
2. The applicants record is void of the complete 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 authenticated by the applicant’s digital 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, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200 by reason of a pattern of misconduct, 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 requested a change to the narrative reason for separation. 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 “JKA” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, for a pattern of misconduct. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.
5. The applicant contends she was never in trouble for anything and that should be reflected in block 28 on the DD Form 214, no pattern of misconduct; also see comments in block 18, continuous honorable active service from 22 November 2012 until 31 January 2012. These contentions were carefully considered; however, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the quality of the applicant’s service.
6. Further, the applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the narrative reason or the characterization of service granted.
7. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.
8. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief.
SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:
Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 14 November 2014 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify: NA
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
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) AR20140000636
Page 5 of 5 pages
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)
CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE