IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  11 August 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110002824 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests her discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant states her misconduct was the result of being repeatedly sexually harassed and assaulted while in the Army.  She attempted to step forward with this information and was told by her superiors to deal with it and keep working.  She felt unsafe and trapped in a situation she could not control and protect herself.  She reacted by leaving without permission.

3.  She states for the past 2 1/2 years she has been receiving mental health services for post-traumatic stress disorder.  Her depression and anxiety have been so severe she has attempted to hurt herself numerous times and she was hospitalized.  Every day is a constant reminder of being victimized and this has taken over her life.

4.  She further requests that the Board take into consideration the level of stress she was under as an explanation for her behavior from August 2003 to 2004.  Prior to her sexual assault, she was a very devoted Soldier, she loved her job, and she was eager to complete any task given to her.  She never had a negative evaluation until the assault occurred.  She dealt with her rape the best way she knew how at the time.

5.  The applicant provides:

* medical records from the Department of Veterans Affairs
* statement from her mother
* personal statement
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  She enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 May 2002 for a period of 3 years.  She completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty 92G (food service specialist).

2.  On 22 October 2003, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant for disobeying a lawful order, being disrespectful, and being absent without leave (AWOL) from 18  September to 15 October 2003.

3.  Records show she was AWOL for 1 day on 28 January 2004.

4.  On 22 June 2004, she underwent a mental status evaluation and was found mentally responsible.  She was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by her command.

5.  On 20 July 2004, the applicant was notified of her pending separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (commission of a serious offense).  The reasons cited for the proposed action were:

* her AWOL period from 31 October to 13 November 2003
* she tested positive for wrongful use of ecstasy
* she committed alcohol offenses on 19 December 2003 and 4 May 2004
* she assaulted an noncommissioned officer
* her Article 15

6.  On 4 August 2004, she consulted with counsel and waived consideration of her case by an administrative separation board and she elected not to submit a statement on her own behalf.

7.  Records show NJP was imposed against the applicant on 5 August 2004 (no other details known).

8.  On 22 September 2004, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

9.  She was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 6 October 2004 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (commission of a serious offense).  She completed a total of 2 years, 4 months, and 7 days of creditable active service with 27 days of lost time.

10.  On 11 May 2009, the Army Discharge Review Board denied her request for a general discharge.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from active duty.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, and abuse of illegal drugs.  The issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.  

12.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.

13.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  She contends she was repeatedly sexually harassed and assaulted while serving in the Army and she reacted by being AWOL.  However, there is no evidence that shows she was a victim of sexual harassment or assault.

2.  Her record of service includes two NJP's and 27 days of lost time.  As a result, her record of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel and is insufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

3.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize her rights.  She had an opportunity to submit a statement in which she could have voiced her concerns and she failed to do so.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons were therefore appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X____  ___X____  ___X____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      __________X____________
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110002824



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110002824



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1