Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/10/13	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that she is requesting an upgrade of her discharge to honorable because she was unfairly discharged from the Army after receiving an Article 15 for fraternization but it was not so in accordance with AR 601-210.  She contends that her unit commander would not meet with her and that she was treated poorly, was threatened and not allowed to talk to men.  She deployed to Iraq and continued to have problems because they did not understand her duties.  She was a good Soldier who did well in her APFT and always tried to do the right thing.  She is seeking the benefits of the GI Bill to continue her college education.  She also requests her rank back and reinstatement in the Army Reserve.  She provides a self-authored detailing her account of the events that led to her discharge from the Army.

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: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 110614   Chapter: 14-12c    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: 94th MP Co, Camp Liberty, Iraq 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): The Article 15 is not contained in the OMPF; however, the applicant provided a copy and it indicates that on 9 January 2011, she received a field grade Article 15 for violating General Order 1A by entering the living quarters of 1LT M (100928); having an inappropriate relationship with 1LT M, a Soldier of a different rank (101122); being disrespectful in deportment to an NCO (101130) and disobeying a lawful order from an NCO (101130).  Her punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay $722.00 for  two months (suspended), reduction to E-2, and extra duty for 45 days (FG).  

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  27
Current ENL Date: OAD 100505    Current ENL Term: 0 Years  400 days
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 01 Mos, 10 Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 02 Mos, 22 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USAR 090323-110614/NIF
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31B10/Military Police Spc   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (100707-110428)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, AFRM-M, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: Steadily employed for 9 years.



VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the Army.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  
       
       The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c by reason of misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JKQ (i.e., misconduct-serious offense) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3."   
       
       The applicant provided her discharge packet which indicates the following:
       
       On 17 April 2011, 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 violating General Order Number 1A by wrongfully visiting the living quarters of 1LT M, a male Soldier on various occasions; violating AR 600-20, paragraph 4-14 by engaging in an inappropriate relationship with 1LT M; disobeying a lawful order from an NCO; and for violating a no-contact order, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  
         
       On 18 April 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, 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 discharge with a characterization of general, under honorable conditions.  
       
       The separation authority reviewed the proposed discharge, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

       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 military records, the issues and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.    
       
       The analyst determined the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of her service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  
       
       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.    
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.   
       
       The applicant contends that her discharge was unjust because she was unfairly given an Article 15, the unit commander would not meet with her and she was poorly treated, threatened and not allowed to talk to men.  She believes that she was a good Soldier and always tried to do the right thing.  However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support the issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that he was unjustly treated, abused, or threatened.  In fact, the applicant’s field grade Article 15 for violating General Order 1A, having an inappropriate relationship while in a combat zone, disobeying a lawful order and being disrespectful in deportment to a NCO, justify the discharge from the Army.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity.  
       
       Furthermore, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and 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 analyst noted the applicant's issue about her desire to use the benefits of the GI Bill.   However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include medical and 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.
       
       Moreover, the applicant contends that the narrative reason for her discharge and reentry code should be changed.  However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)", the reentry code is “3,” and the separation code is "JKQ."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  
       
       The issues related to reinstatement in the USAR and getting her rank back 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. 
       
       Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 21 May 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: A self-authored statement, DD Form 149, copies of congresional correspondence, medical documents, four character reference letters, orders, and emails (3).  Additionally, the applicant provided a copy of an AR 15-6 investigation dated 20 December 2010, letters of recommendation, email correspondence, Article 15, counseling statements, additional medical documents, training certificates, letter of reprimand, two email statements, an OER, and her discharge packet with all allied documents.



 

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing her testimony 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						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 2    No change 3
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: NA
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 AR20110020563
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 4 pages