Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/06/29	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, through counsel, that she requests her discharge be upgraded to honorable. The reason for her discharge includes use of marijuana, fighting and other violations. The characterization of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions is not a fair characterization; her record as a Soldier shows much more good than bad, and since her discharge, she has been an asset to herself and others. The following issues are provided for the Board's consideration.  

Issue 1:  The applicant was a good Soldier and her superiors failed to consider her complete service record.  As a Soldier, she worked as a medic earning several medals and ribbons for her service in and during the Iraq War. The same holds true in civilian life.  She has continued to be an above-average psychology student at Georgia State University, while maintaining a job and volunteering at the Atlanta Children’s Shelter.   Though use of marijuana is serious, it marked an isolated time in her life when she suffered from and was diagnosed with depression after an Iraq War deployment.  Her current discharge status is inequitable in that her superiors in review of certain violations failed to consider her complete service record; if they had done so, they would have been apprised of her good reputation and commendable record despite her post-Iraq condition.  The applicant signed up for the Army before graduating from high school and charted a plan to get a college degree paid by the G.I. Bill.  She became a medic and found herself helping people and saving more than 3,000 soldier and civilian lives in the midst of the Iraq War. She feels that her overall record shows a person with a good reputation for empathy, courage and good nature; and who can boast of her medals, ribbons and other accomplishments. 

Issue 2:  The applicant’s depression and anger issues, coupled with her youth and inexperience, led to her acts of misconduct.  Upon her return from Iraq, the applicant showed symptoms of post war stress. According to her medical records, this stress manifested itself in the form of depression and anger.  She reached out to medical professionals at Fort Benning and received some clinical treatment and counseling, she had coping difficulties with dreams and thoughts of mortar attacks and interacting with people.  Due to her youth and inexperience, she engaged in some fairly mild but reckless behavior; that included experimentation with marijuana. 

Issue 3:  The Applicant contends that since leaving the Army, she has returned to college and is gainfully employed.  Since then, and as planned, she has returned to college and has been gainfully employed at Titlemax of Georgia, Inc.  With time and a positive support system, she has been able to manage her depression and temperament.  The applicant also realizes her mistakes and feels that she has learned valuable lessons to carry into the future.  
 
Issue 4:  The Command did not establish that rehabilitation was impractical or unlikely to succeed.  Her current discharge status is improper.  The applicant asserts that her current discharge status is improper in that her superiors in review of certain violations failed to clearly establish that rehabilitation for misconduct was impractical or unlikely to succeed. And, if done so, they would have been apprised of her desire and willingness to receive treatment and counseling, and to correct her condition.  There was also an altercation with a fellow soldier that began in jest but ended with pushing. However, this altercation was overstated as causing no real injury and as she rebuked her own actions with an apology.  This does not change the fact that she was cited by some in her chain of command as being a very good medic and Soldier who helped and saved a countless number of lives in Iraq.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: Commander's memorandum is undated
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 090420   Chapter: 14-12c(2)    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: C Company, 203d Brigade Support Battalion, 3d Brigade Combat Team, Fort Benning, GA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 081010, without authority failed to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty, 0530 Weapons Draw (080821); without authority failed to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty, 0630 Accountability Formation (080821); having received a lawful order from SSG P to do 25 pushups, willfully disobey the same (080918); disrespectful toward SSG P by walking away while he was talking (080918); reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $755.00 pay per month, suspended to be automatically remitted, if not vacated before (090428); extra duty for 45 days, and restriction for 45 days, (FG). 

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): The record notes a Summary Court-Martial (090311), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $933.00 pay per month for one month and 20 days confinement, the Court-Martial is NIF.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 060721    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	 2   Yrs, 9 Mos, 0 Days ?????
Total Service:  		 2   Yrs, 9 Mos, 0 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 68W10 Health Care Specialist   GT: 123   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (070308 - 080512)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM w/CS, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Riverdale, GA
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant returned to college, has been gainfully employed at Titlemax of Georgia, Inc. and volunteers at the Atlanta Children’s Shelter.   

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, for failing to report on multiple occasions, testing positive for Marijuana (081112), and assaulting SPC F (090120), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  
       
       On 5 March 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived her right to an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 16 April 2009, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.
       
       The record contains a Military Police Report, dated 20 January 2009.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14   of this regulation establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed.  Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.   

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s available military records the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found several mitigating factors which would merit a partial upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  
       
       The analyst does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. 
       
       The analyst acknowledges the applicant's  post Army accomplishments as stated in her application and congratulates the applicant on her successful transition into the civilian sector. 
       
       The analyst found the applicant's overall quality of service and her combat service partially mitigated the discrediting entries in her service record. 
       
       The analyst noted the applicant’s youth at the time of enlistment and an apparent lack of maturity.  While the applicant's misconduct and poor duty performance were a clear departure from acceptable Army standards, the analyst found that the offenses were partially mitigated by youth and immaturity.  Accordingly the analyst determined that the characterization of service was too harsh and as a result, it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that her characterization of service is too harsh and recommends relief in the form of a partial upgrade.  
       
       Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the analyst determined the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 25 January 2012         Location: Washington, D. C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: Mr. Nubiyn M. Mzekewe, 1963 Highway 138 SW, Riverdale, GA  30296

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 with a statement through counsel, a DD Form 214 and excerpts from the applicant's OMPF.

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  The Board carefully examined the applicant's record and considered her contentions as outlined below:

Issue 1 is rejected.  The Board found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The Board was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.   The Board acknowledged the applicant’s in-service accomplishments and considered the quality of her service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the repeated incidents of misconduct, the multiple negative counseling statements, and the documented actions under Article 15 of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice.  The Board determined that the applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant’s service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.

Issue 2 is rejected.  The Board noted that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age.
Furthermore, the record reflects that the applicant was enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) in September 2008 and attended at least twelve counseling sessions for cannabis abuse over a four month period.  Despite her enrollment, the applicant tested positive for marijuana use on a unit urinalysis test given to 100% of the unit on 12 November 2008.  The record also reflects that the applicant attended six Anger Management sessions after her deployment to Iraq.  In one session, on 5 November 2008, the applicant told the counselor that her anger management problems began before she enlisted in the Army.  
Additionally, the Board noted the Major Depressive Disorder diagnosis from the Veterans Administration and the disability rating granted.  In review of the applicant's entire service record, the Board found that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  The record shows that on 7 January 2009, the applicant underwent a mental evaluation which indicates that she was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong.  The Board concluded that just because the applicant suffers from Major Depressive Disorder does not mean she doesn't know the difference between right and wrong or that she did not have control over her behavior.  There are many Soldiers with the same condition that complete their service successfully.

Issue 3 is rejected.  The Board acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments contained in the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the Board found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  Further, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  

Issue 4 is rejected.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 1-16d(2), entitled “Counseling and Rehabilitative Requirements”, states that the rehabilitative requirements may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier.  Moreover, the evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting herself to Army standards by providing counseling, by the imposition of non-judicial punishment, and by their support of her attendance at ASAP and Anger Management counseling.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.


















        
IX.  Board Decision						
	
Board Vote:  							          	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
							         
X.  Board Action Directed					         
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA


XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:
EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board



BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder























Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20110013609
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 5 pages