IN THE CASE OF: Ms. BOARD DATE: 11 March 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140006244 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 overall quality of the applicant’s service, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. 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 her general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, aside from her two APFT failures, she did not commit any infractions or receive non-judicial punishment while serving in the military. The applicant contends, her service records warrant an honorable discharge. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 7 April 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 28 March 2014 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Physical Standards, AR 635-200, Chapter 13-2e, JFT, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: Headquarters and Headquarters Battery, 3d Battalion, 29th Field Artillery Regiment, 3d Armored Brigade Combat Team, Fort Carson, CO f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 28 August 2012/3 years, 31 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 7 months, 1 day h. Total Service: 1 year, 7 months, 1 day i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 35F10, Intelligence Analyst m. GT Score: 121 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWTSM, ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: N/A s. Performance Ratings: N/A t. Counseling Statements: No u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 March 2012, for a period of 3 years and 31 weeks. She was 20 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. She completed 1 year, 8 months, and 1 day of active duty service. When her discharge proceedings were initiated, she was serving at Fort Carson, Colorado. 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 applicant provided a copy of the commander’s notification letter, dated 11 March 2014, informing her of the initiation of separation action under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 13, by reason of unsatisfactory performance; specifically for, failing two consecutive Army Physical Fitness Tests (APFT) between 14 January 2014 and 19 February 2014. 2. On 12 March 2014, the unit commander recommended an honorable discharge and advised the applicant of her rights. 3. On 12 March 2014, the intermediate commander reviewed the proposed separation action and recommended approval with an honorable discharge. 4. The applicant’s election of rights and the separation approving authority memorandum directing the applicant’s discharge are not part of the available record and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. 5. On 21 March 2014, DA, Headquarters, United States Army Garrison, Fort Carson, CO, Orders Number 080-0005, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army effective 28 March 2014. 6. The record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. The DD Form 214 indicates on 28 March 2014, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 13-2e, by reason of physical standards, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JFT and a reentry (RE) code of 3. 7. The applicant’s available record does not show any recorded actions under the UCMJ, unauthorized absences or time lost. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: Discharge Orders Number 080-0005; dated 21 March 2014, Headquarters, United States Army Garrison, Fort Carson, CO shows the applicant was discharged from the Army with an effective date of: 28 March 2014. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: 1. The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 2 April 2014, and a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review; a portion of her discharge packet, which contained the company commander’s notification letter, battalion and company commanders’ letters addressed to the separation authority recommending the applicant’s characterization of service be honorable, and the intermediate commander’s recommendation for separation. 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 her discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, her 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’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the former Soldier’s discharge from the Army. However, the record shows that on 21 March 2014, Headquarters, United States Army Garrison, Fort Carson, CO, Orders Number 080-0005, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army effective 28 March 2014, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 3. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity shall prevail, 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 contention about her service record warranting an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable was carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. 5. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be her responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the complete 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 presumption of government 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, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the overall quality of the applicant’s service, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 11 March 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 5 No Change: 0 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) AR20140006244 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1