IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 15 April 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140006634 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT: 1. The applicant requests to change the narrative reason and the reentry code for his discharge. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he feels the reentry code should be a “1,” because he was a great Soldier. The NCO Academy decision of dismissing him from school should be viewed in a different way. He has been out of high school for 12 years and his writing skill is a thing of the past. His superiors should have worked with him, instead of dismissing him. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 14 April 2014 b. Discharge Received: Honorable c. Date of Discharge: 24 January 2014 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Unsatisfactory Performance, AR 635-200, Chapter 13, JHJ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: HQs, 2nd Bn, 506th Infantry Regiment (Rear) (Provisional), 4th BCT (R)(P), 101st Airborne Div (Air Assault), Fort Campbell, KY f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 3 December 2010, 5 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 1 month, 22 days h. Total Service: 11 years, 11 months, 2 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: ARNG (020223-050803) / HD RA (050804-070124) / HD RA (070125-090503) / HD RA (090504-101202) (NIF) / HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist m. GT Score: 77 n. Education: One year college o. Overseas Service: Afghanistan, Iraq, Hawaii p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (100731-110727), Iraq (071123- 090526) q. Decorations/Awards: AAM-2; AGCM-2; NDSM; ACM-2CS; ICM-2CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR-3; NATO MDL; CAB r. Administrative Separation Board: No, waived right to consult with legal counsel s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 August 2005, and reenlisted three times thereafter. The latter reenlistment was on 3 December 2010, for a period of 5 years. He was 22 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate with one year college. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist. He served in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Hawaii. He earned two AAMs and a CAB. He completed 11 years, 11 months, and 2 days of active duty and reserve service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record shows that on 31 October 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 being counseled on divers occasions for misconduct (130827-130906), while attending an NCOES school which result in his dismissal from the Warriors Leaders Course (WLC). 2. The unit commander recommended an honorable discharge and advised the applicant of his rights. 3. On 6 November 2013, the applicant waived his right to consult with legal counsel, indicated he understood the impact of the discharge action, and made no election on his right to have his case considered by an administrative separation board, but elected to submit a statement on his behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. 4. On 12 November 2013, the separation authority approved and directed the applicant’s discharge with an honorable characterization of service. 5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 24 January 2014, with a characterization of service of honorable under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, for unsatisfactory performance, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JHJ, and an RE code of 3. 6. The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Service School Academic Evaluation Report, dated 6 September 2013, indicates the applicant failed to achieve the course standards of WLC. He was dismissed for failing to follow instructions, lacking motivation, failing to display the leadership abilities and level of judgment required for NCOES. 2. Memorandum, dated 6 September 2013, subject: Notification of Dismissal from Warrior Leader Course (WLC) … and Right to Appeal, addressed to the applicant, indicates the reasons for his dismissal were failing to follow instructions, lacking motivation, and being disrespectful. 3. Two negative counseling statements, dated 18 September 2013 and 13 November 2013, for being expelled from WLC for disciplinary reasons; being flagged for the purpose of separation action being initiated; and being indebted to the US Army due to recoupment of reenlistment bonus. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided with his online application, extract copies of DA PAM 710-2-1, pages 73 and 227, and applicant’s sworn statement, dated 14 May 2011. 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 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 RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request to change the narrative reason and its corresponding reentry code for his discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, and the documents and issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit changes to the narrative reason and its corresponding reentry code of his 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. 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 was a great Soldier and should not have been dismissed for lacking in his writing skill but that his superiors should have worked with him. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence to support the contention that he may have been unjustly discriminated. The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or sufficient evidence has been provided with the request to change the narrative reason for his discharge. 5. Regarding the applicant’s contentions about changing the reason for the discharge and the reentry code, 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. 6. Further, 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 as Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 7. 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. Accordingly, the records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 8. Therefore, the narrative reason for discharge being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 15 April 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None 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 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) AR20140006634 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1