Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/07/12	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that she was injured on active duty and was recommended for a MEB in October 2009.  Her MEB was completed and approved to go forward to the PEB.  In late February 2010 her command recommended her for a chapter 14-12b (Pattern of Misconduct); administrative discharge.  During the separation board proceeding three, Department of the Army physicians testified that her medical conditions were the direct cause of the conduct which led to the recommendation for administrative elimination. Her PTSD and other mental health conditions are extensively documented and have resulted in three hospitalizations within the last year.  She is requesting several changes to her DD 214 which include a restoration of rank to E-4, change to block 12i (effective date of pay grade), to read 20090701, block 16 (days accrued leave paid) changed to read 60, block 18 (remarks) changed to read “continuous honorable active service; 20030709 – 20110125;” block 24 (character of service) changed to honorable conditions; and block 28 (narrative reason for separation) changed to Medical Conditions.

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: 100408
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 110125   Chapter:  14-12b     AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 280th Military Police Detachment (CID), Bldg, 1467, Fort Knox, KY                     

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 090702, violated a lawful general order, by wrongfully creating sexually explicit material and containing it on her electronic media storage device, (090422), violated a lawful general regulation by wrongfully having a sexual relationship with CW3 K, (081122), reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $500.00 pay per month for two months, to perform extra duty for five days, and an oral reprimand, (FG).

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  23
Current ENL Date: 081122    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2  Yrs, 2 Mos, 3  Days ?????
Total Service:  		7  Yrs, 6 Mos, 17Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 030709 - 081121/HD
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31D10 CID Special agent   GT: 111   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany and SWA   Combat: Iraq (080822 -090719)
Decorations/Awards: AAM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM w/CS, NPDR, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Radcliff, KY
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 8 April 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct, for receiving a GOMOR for disrespecting her superiors (091223), failing to attend a mandatory formation, failing to inform her chain of command of out-of-office appointments, and failing to wear her uniform as directed, wrongfully accessing the file regarding the shootings at Fort Hood, and receiving a Field Grade article 15 for a violating a general order (090701) with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 18 May 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of additional misconduct that would considered in conjuction with her initial notice, that on diverse occasions she wrongfully distributed Klonopin, a schedule IV controlled substance to another Soldier, PV1 T, without proper authority (100413). She was advised of her rights.  
       
       On 8 April 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested an administrative separation board and submitted 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 18 May 2010, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of her rights.  On 30 September 2010, the administrative separation board convened.  The applicant appeared with counsel.  The board recommended the applicant be discharged with issuance of a character of service of under other than honorable conditions.
       
       On 17 December 2010, the separation authority approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board, and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service ofunder other than honorable conditions.
       
       The record contains a GOMOR, undated.
       
       The record contains a CID report dated, 3 May 2010.

       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 found the length of the applicant's service to include the former Soldier’s combat service and the medical circumstances surrounding the discharge mitigated the discrediting entries in her service record.  
       
       Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue about various entries on her DD 214 which include block 12i, changing block 16 to read 60 days, and block 18; however, the corrections the applicant requests to be made to the DD Form 214, do not fall within the purview of this Board.  The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), utilizing the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter.  A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. 
       
       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: 17 August 2011         Location: Washington, D. C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 with a self-authored statement, letters of recommendation, VA Form 21-4138, portions of AR 635-200, MEDCOM Policy Memo dated, 9 June 2010, Chapter 1-33, Approved MEB, counseling statement, statements of T, and R, and a DD Form 214.

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 1    No change 4
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA








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 AR20110013610
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages