IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 25 March 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130013393
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 an upgrade of her general discharge under honorable conditions to fully honorable.
2. The applicant states her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) should be corrected to show a fully honorable discharge to coincide with her Honorable Discharge Certificate from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) in 2008. She further states that two records of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) should not justify discharging her for misconduct.
3. The applicant provides a self-authored letter to the Board explaining her circumstances at the time and a copy of her Honorable Discharge Certificate.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the USAR on 11 January 2000 under the Delayed Entry Program. She was discharged from the USAR on 4 July 2000 for immediate enlistment in the Regular Army. She enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 July 2000 for a period of 3 years and training as a unit supply specialist. She completed her training and was transferred to Fort Bliss, Texas, for assignment to a Patriot battery.
2. On 26 February 2002, NJP was imposed against her for failing to report to her place of duty, being disrespectful in language toward a superior noncommissioned officer (NCO), and being derelict in the performance of her duties.
3. On 10 June 2002, NJP was imposed against her for two specifications of leaving her place of duty without authority, disobeying a lawful order from an NCO, and two additional specifications of disobeying lawful orders.
4. On 12 July 2002, the applicant's commander notified her that he was initiating action to discharge her from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12b, by reason of a pattern of misconduct. He cited the applicant's disciplinary record and her failure to respond to repeated counseling as the basis for his recommendation.
5. After consulting with counsel, the applicant elected not to submit a statement in her own behalf.
6. On 16 July 2002, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.
7. Accordingly, she was discharged under honorable conditions due to misconduct on 30 July 2002 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14. She completed 2 years and 26 days of active service.
8. On 8 July 2008, orders were published which honorably discharged the applicant from the USAR.
9. The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) in December 2012 requesting an upgrade of her discharge. After reviewing the applicant's contentions and available evidence, the ADRB determined her discharge was both proper and equitable under the circumstances and voted unanimously to deny her request for an upgrade of her discharge.
10. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and procedures for separating personnel for misconduct. Specific categories included minor infractions, a pattern of misconduct, involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities, and commission of a serious offense, which includes drug offenses. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
11. Paragraph 3-7a of Army Regulation 635-200 provides that 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.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's contentions regarding her discharge have been noted; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating when compared to the repeated nature of her misconduct. The applicant's overall service simply did not rise to the level of a fully honorable discharge.
2. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
3. Accordingly, the characterization and the narrative reason for separation were appropriate for the circumstances of her case.
4. It should also be noted that the orders discharging her from the USAR were apparently issued in error because she was not transferred to the USAR when she was discharged. However, it has long been the policy of the Board not to make an applicant worse off than when he or she applied; accordingly, the Board will not revoke the discharge.
5. In the absence of evidence showing an error or injustice occurred in her case, there appears to be no basis to grant her request.
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) AR20130013393
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130013393
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130000670
On 16 July 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a copy of her honorable discharge certificate, dated 8 July 2008 and discharge orders, dated 8 July 2008, from the U.S. Army Reserve. Moreover, although she received an honorable discharge certificate in July 2008 for her service with the U.S. Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000049
On 9 March 2000, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of misconduct - commission of a serious offense and directed the applicant be issued a General Discharge Certificate. A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. Here, the applicant's active duty service was interrupted by her serious misconduct, not by any...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004494
On 18 April 2002, the company commander notified the applicant of contemplated separation with a general discharge under honorable conditions due to a pattern of misconduct. The company commander recommended a general discharge, the chain of command concurred, and the separation authority directed the issuance of a general discharge. Accordingly, on 28 May 2002, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, due to a pattern of misconduct.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079157C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 24 July 2001, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intention to initiate separation action under the provisions of paragraph 14-12b, Army Regulation 635-200, for a pattern of misconduct with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. On 7 November 2001, the separation authority disapproved retaining the applicant for 6 months and directed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013710C071029
The review concluded by indicating that only the GCMCA could approve separation with an honorable discharge or refer the case to an administrative separation board authorized to recommended an UOTHC discharge. On 12 July 2006, the ADRB found the applicant's discharge improper based on it being approved by an improper separation authority, and it voted to upgrade the applicant's discharge to an honorable discharge and to change the authority and reason for her separation. Although there was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110025042
The applicant requests the removal of all counseling statements, records of nonjudicial punishment (NJP), and any other non-medical related documents from her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. Notwithstanding the action of the ADRB...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130007479
Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and informed the applicant of his rights. On 27 February 2002, the separation authority, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions discharge. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT The applicant provided a self authored statement dated 18 March 2013, copy of his DD Form 214 for the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023201
On 19 March 1993, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct, commission of a serious offense and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. The applicant was accordingly discharged on 26 March 1993. The regulation states the reason for discharge based on separation code "JKQ" is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)" and the regulatory authority is Army Regulation 635-200,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020977
The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 26 December 2002 to show: * completion of first full term of service * rank/grade of specialist (SPC)/E-4 instead of private (PV1)/E-1 * reentry eligibility (RE) code of 1 instead RE code 3 2. There is no evidence in the applicant's record that shows he was advanced to the rank/grade of SPC/E-4 during his period of service. The applicant contends that his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011302
After his discharge from active duty, [the FSM] joined the Ohio Army National Guard, [from] which he was honorably discharged [in] July 2001 and the U.S. Army Reserve, [from] which he was honorably discharged [in] December 2006. The applicant provides an Honorable Discharge Certificate showing the FSM was discharged from the ARNG on 26 July 2001. On or about 24 January 2002, the FSM again submitted a DD Form 293 to the ADRB requesting upgrade of his discharge from the RA to honorable.