Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/05/29	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that block 24 of her DD Form 214 needs to say, "Honorable 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: 110719
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 110812   Chapter: 5-17    AR: 635-200
Reason: Condition, Not a Disability	   RE:     SPD: JFV   Unit/Location: C Company, 447th Signal Battalion, 15th Regimental Signal Brigade, Fort Gordon, GA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 110607, AWOL (110415-110603) for 20 days, reduced to E-1; forfeiture of $733 x 2 months, 45-day extra duty and restriction, (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 100913    Current ENL Term: 05 Years  34 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 11 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 11 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 100   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM

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

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 10 July 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, AR 635-200, by reason of physical condition, not a disability for being diagnosed by competent medical authority with an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge because she had over 20 days of AWOL. The applicant was advised of her rights.  
       
       There is no record that the applicant consulted with a legal counsel and whether she elected to submit a statement in her own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Service.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       On 3 August 2011, the separation authority directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-17 specifically provides that a Soldier may be separated for other physical or mental conditions not amounting to a disability under Army Regulation 635-40, which interferes with assignment to or performance of duty.  The regulation requires that the condition interferes with the Soldiers’ ability to perform duty, and requires that the diagnosis be so severe that the Soldier’s ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired.  Army Regulation 635-200 states that a Soldier being separated under this paragraph will be awarded a characterization of service of honorable, under honorable conditions, or an uncharacterized description of service if in entry-level status.  A general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally inappropriate for individuals separated under the provisions of Chapter 5-17 unless properly notified of the specific factors in the service that warrant such characterization.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records for the period of enlistment under review and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst recommends that relief be denied in this case.  
       
       A mental status evaluation by competent medical authority diagnosed the applicant with an adjustment disorder with depressed mood.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation under provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, by reason of other designated physical or mental condition not amounting to a disability, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge and informed the applicant as to the specific factors in her service record that would warrant such discharge.  The analyst was satisfied that all the requirements of law and regulations were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       
       The applicant applied for an upgrade; however, she 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.  In addition, 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 her issue for an upgrade.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that she may have been unjustly discriminated.   In fact, the applicant’s Article 15 and the commander's memorandum detailed she was academically eliminated from her MOS course for having failed six examinations, twice in security, and had shown no improvement in her ability to adapt to the military environment.  She has not provided any documentation or evidence in support of her request for an upgrade of her discharge.  
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined the narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 12 October 2012         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Online application, dated 23 May 2012.

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 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: NA
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




ARCHIE L. DAVIS III
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 AR20120010088
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages