AR20140003577

IN THE CASE OF: Mr.

BOARD DATE: 30 January 2015

CASE NUMBER: AR20140003577
___________________________________________________________________________

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 APPLICANTS REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation.

2. The applicant states, in effect, his separation code contradicts his service achievements. Prior to his discharge, except for the pt test failure, he was a superb Soldier. He thought it relevant to mention, his chain of command at the time of his discharge, was relieved of duty due to an incident directly related to the treatment of a Soldier which led to his death.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 24 February 2014
b. Discharge received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 14 March 2013
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Unsatisfactory Performance, Chapter 13, AR 635-200, JHJ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: Charlie Troop, 3-89th Cavalry Regiment, Fort Polk, LA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 9 September 2009, 4 years and 18 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 6 months, 6 days
h. Total Service: 3 years, 6 months, 6 days
i. Previous Discharges: None
j. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4
k. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B10, Infantryman
l. GT Score: NIF
m. Education: HS Graduate
n. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia
o. Combat Service: Afghanistan (101026-111006)
p. Decorations/Awards: AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-W/2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, NATO MDL, CIB
q. Administrative Separation Board: No
r. Performance Ratings: No
s. Counseling Statements: NIF
t. Prior Board Review: No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 September 2009, for a period of 4 years and 18 weeks. He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B10, Infantryman. His record also shows he served a combat tour, earned several awards including two AAMs and an AGCM; and he achieved the rank of SPC/E-4. He was serving at Fort Polk, LA when his discharge was initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

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

2. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged on 14 March 2013, under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, for unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JHJ and a reentry (RE) code of 3.

3. The applicants available service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences, time lost or actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

4. On 8 March 2013, DA, HQs, Joint Readiness Training Center & Fort Polk, Fort Polk, LA, Orders Number 067-0311, discharged the applicant from the Army effective 14 March 2013.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD:

1. A DD Form 214, dated 14 March 2013.

2. Discharge Orders Number 067-0311, dated 8 March 2013.

3. Enlistment/Reenlistment Document, dated 9 September 2009.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, and two support statements.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

The applicant did not provide any information with 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 policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.
3. 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, unsatisfactory performance.

4. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of “JHJ” will be assigned an RE Code of 3.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1. The applicants request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge and a change to the narrative reason for separation was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicants available military records, the issues and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would 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 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 authenticated by the applicant’s digital signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.

3. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Barring evidence to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all 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 “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. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.

5. The applicant contends his separation code contradicts his service achievements. The separation code assigned for separating a Soldier is not based on his service achievements; it is based on the reason for his discharge.

6. The applicant further contends, he thought it was relevant to mention, his chain of command at the time of his discharge, was relieved of duty due to an incident directly related to the treatment of a Soldier, which led to his death. 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 that he was treated unfairly by his chain of command.

7. The applicant also contends prior to his discharge, except for the pt test failure he was a superb Soldier. 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 any evidence, to support a change to the reason for discharge or the characterization of service granted.

8. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicants performance. They all recognize his good conduct before and after leaving the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicants chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity.

9. It is still the applicants 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 Boards consideration because they are not available in the official record

10. Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service was both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 30 January 2015 Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify: NA

Counsel: No

Witnesses/Observers: NA

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 RE Code to: NA
Grade Restoration to: NA
Change Authority for Separation: 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) AR20140003577

Page 5 of 6 pages

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

1