Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/10/06	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, “I was discharged from the Army because of my failure to pay the full court ordered amount of child support.  DFAS took the maximum amount allowed from my paycheck every month.  I was fighting the court ordered amount while I was enlisted.  As an E-4 I was ordered to pay $1844 a month in child support as well as an additional $125 in child support.  I don’t feel that the fact that I did not make enough money to honor this obligation is grounds for a misconduct discharge from the military.  I was a good Soldier, and received several COA’s from my commander.  I was never in trouble, always where I was supposed to be doing my job.  My only issue was the fact my ex-husband harassed my command in regards to the support and my command knew I was actively fighting it with the state of Michigan.  My ex-husband became such a nuisance to my command and threatened violence against my Colonel and fellow commanding officers that he was banned from Fort Hood for life and plead guilty to charges of terrorism and harassment in federal court.  I did not want to leave the Army; I loved my job and my military service.       I would like to go back and continue to serve my country in any capacity I can.”

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: 110216
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 110308   Chapter: 14-12b     AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1st Battalion, 229th Aviation Regiment, Fort Hood, Texas  

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 090820, signed an official document: DD Form 1351-2, Travel voucher or subvoucher, which document was false in that the child she claimed on the voucher never moved with her or resided at Fort Hood, Texas on a permanent basis (090310); reduction to E-2, suspended to be automatically remitted if not vacated (100302); forfeiture of $366 pay, extra duty for 14 days, restriction for 7 days; (CG).

110119, violated a lawful general order by wrongfully failing to comply with the provisions of a court order (110101); forfeiture of $440 per month for one month suspended to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (110420);extra duty for 5 days; restriction for 14 days; (CG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  38
Current ENL Date: 080604    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2  Yrs, 9 Mos, 5 Days ?????
Total Service:  		2  Yrs, 9 Mos, 5 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 25U10 Support Systems Specialist   GT: 120   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR


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


VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 16 February 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, pattern of misconduct, for making false official statements, and failing to obey a lawful order with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  
       
       On 16 February 2011, the applicant waived consultation with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived her right to an administrative separation board (was not entitled) 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 17 February 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts 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 the applicant’s available 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 that 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 her 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 or poor duty performance.  
       
       The applicant contends mitigating circumstances contributed to her misconduct; specifically, family issues contributed to her discharge.  While the applicant may believe her family issues were the underlying cause of her misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that she sought relief from stress through her command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other resources available to all Soldiers.  Likewise, she has provided no evidence that she should not be held responsible for her misconduct.
       
       The analyst noted that the applicant does not feel that the fact that she did not make enough money to honor the court order should be grounds for a misconduct discharge from the military; however, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst 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 that the applicant would like to go back and continue to serve her country in any capacity she can.  At the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact the local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 
        
        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.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 6 April 2012         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 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						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 1    No change 4
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 AR20110020127
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 4 pages