IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 May 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140009699 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 an upgrade of his discharge characterization from general, under honorable conditions to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he was treated wrong when he received his Article 15, for supposedly hitting an NCO. He desires to attend school. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 2 June 21014 b. Discharge received: General, under honorable conditions c. Date of Discharge: 22 August 2012 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Unsatisfactory Performance, Chapter 13, JHJ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: Forward Support Company, 1-187th Infantry Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, Fort Campbell, KY f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 20 January 2010, 3 years and 25 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 6 months, 28 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 6 months, 28 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-2 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 92G10,Food Service Operations m. GT Score: 92 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (101009-110207) q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: No t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 January 2010, for a period of 3 years and 25 weeks. He was 19 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 92G10, Food Service Operations. His record also shows he served a combat tour; he did not earn any awards for acts of valor or significant achievements. He was serving at Fort Campbell, KY when his discharge was initiated. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The applicant’s service record shows on 25 July 2012, 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 the following offenses: a. failing to go to his appointed place of duty x 2 (120717, 120516), and b. failing a record Army Physical Fitness Tests (APFT) on two occasions (120118-120321). 2. The unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights. 3. On 1 August 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement on his own behalf (which is not contained in the available record). The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. 4. On 2 August 2012, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 22 August 2012, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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. A FG Article 15, dated 12 July 2012 for failing to go to his appointed place of duty x 2 (120516, 120516); the punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $745 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days, and an oral reprimand. 2. He received five negative counseling statements, dated between 18 January 2012 and 17 July 2012, for failing the pt test, notification of separation action, assaulting a NCO, debt counseling and failing to report. 3. The record contains a DA Form 705 (Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard), indicating applicant failed two record pt tests on 18 January 2012 and 21 March 2012. 4. DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 7 May 2012, indicating the applicant was screened for PTSD and mTBI in accordance with OTSG/MEDCOM Policy Memo 10-040 and the screens were negative. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for Chapter 14-12b consideration per his command. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant submitted a DD Form 293 dated 22 May 2014. 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. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's 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. By his unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable characterization of service. 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 treated wrong when he received his Article 15, for supposedly hitting an NCO. The record of evidence shows the offense of assaulting a NCO was deleted from the Article 15 the applicant received and he was only charged with failing to go to his appointed place of duty on two occasions. 5. Further, the applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support his contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention he was treated wrong. 6. Also, 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. 7. The applicant desires to attend school. Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 8. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 9. 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: 15 May 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) AR20140009699 Page 2 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1