IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 3 November 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20140014714 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing her testimony, 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 her general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. 2. The applicant did not present any issues of equity or propriety for the Board to consider. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 18 August 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 13 August 2014 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Unsatisfactory Performance, AR 635-200, Chapter 13, JHJ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: Forward Support Company, 4th Engineer Battalion, Fort Carson, CO f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 1 August 2013/2 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 13 days h. Total Service: 6 years, 8 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: RA, 080806-130731, HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 92A20, Automated Logistical Specialist m. GT Score: 88 n. Education: Some College o. Overseas Service: SWA, Egypt, Germany p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (131007-131213) q. Decorations/Awards: 2-AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-CS, ASR, OSR, GWOTSM, NATOMDL, mFOM r. Administrative Separation Board: NIF s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 August 2008, for a period of 4 years. She was 19 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. She reenlisted on 13 August 2014, for a period of two years, served in Afghanistan, Egypt, and Germany and earned an AAM. She completed 6 years, 8 days of active duty service. When her discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Carson, CO. 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 record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant’s signature. 2. The DD Form 214 indicates that on 13 August 2014, the applicant was discharged 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 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: Disqualification of Army Good Conduct Medal memorandum, dated 2 July 2014, indicates the applicant was disapproved for the AGCM for patterns of misconduct and unsatisfactory performance. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided an online application, and a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any in support of her 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 available record of service, 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 his discharge from the Army. However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214, which was not authenticated by the applicant's 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 13, AR 635-200, unsatisfactory performance, 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 bears the 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 Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record. 5. Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Personal Appearance Date: 3 November 2014 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: None 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: No Change Change RE Code to: No Change 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) AR20140014714 Page 2 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1