IN THE CASE OF:  	
      
      BOARD DATE:  	28 August 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130004519
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.




      
      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of her discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, she is having issues moving up in her career without an honorable discharge.  She should have been medically discharged because her shoulders were injured.  She desires to receive VA benefits.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		4 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			29 December 2006
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Pattern of Misconduct , AR 635-200, Chapter 14 						paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			D Co, 526th Brigade Support Battalion, 2nd Brigade						Combat Team, Fort Campbell, KY
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	1 March 2006, 3 years and 18 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	9 months, 29 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 3 months, 17 days/block 12e on the 							applicant’s DD Form 214 total prior inactive service, is 					incorrect and should read 1 year, 5 months, 18 days. 
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		ARNG-(040911-060228)/NA
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	88M10, Motor Transport Operator
m. GT Score:				112
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		No
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:	

The applicant enlisted in Army National Guard on 11 September 2004, for a period of 8 years.  She was 17 years old at the time of entry and not a high graduate.  She requested a conditional release from the National Guard to join the regular Army.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 March 2006, for a period of 3 years and 18 weeks.  She was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  She was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 88M10, Motor Transport Operator.  Her record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements.  She was serving at Fort Campbell, KY, when her discharge was initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 12 December 2006, 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 a pattern of misconduct.  Specifically for the following offenses:

     a.  failing to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty x 10 (060822, 060823, 060901, 060906, 060915, 060916, 060918, 060920, 060922, 061004)

     b.  disobeying a superior commissioned officer x 2 (060906, 060907)

     c.  reporting for extra duty almost three hours late (060910)

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of her rights.

3.  On 14 December 2006, the applicant waived her right to consult with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not in did not submit a statement on her 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.  

4.  On 20 December 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5.  The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

6  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 29 December 2006, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for a pattern of misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and an RE code of 3.
EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  An Article 15, dated 18 October 2006 for without authority, failing to at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty x 6 (060915, 060916, 060918, 060920, 060922, 061004); the punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $636 pay x 2 months, extra duty for 45 days and restriction for 45 days, (FG).

2.  An Article 15, dated 8 September 2006 for without authority, failing to at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty x 4 (060822, 060823, 060901, 060906); willfully disobeying a lawful command from a commissioned officer (CPT) x 2, (060906, 060907); the punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $713 pay x 2 months (suspended), extra duty for 45 days and restriction for 45 days, (FG).

3.  On 14 September 2006, the suspension of punishment of forfeiture of $713 pay x 2 months was vacated for the new offense of reporting late almost three hours for extra duty (060910).

4.  She received 19 negative counseling statements which were completed between 23 August 2006 and 4 September 2010, for failing to report on numerous occasions, failing to report for brigade staff duty, disobeying orders, receiving an Article 15, three hours late for extra duty, missing extra duty, drunk on duty and underage drinking.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293; Letter of recommendation for promotion, two certificates of completion, DD Form 368 (Request for Conditional Release), Verification of Military Experience and Training (VMET), four pages, character statement, letter of recommendation, applicant’s resume, four pages, list of supporting documents, DD Form 214; and Discharge Orders 355-0605.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any with the application.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 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 being absent 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.

2.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, 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.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

3.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

4.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  It identifies the SPD code of "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, pattern of misconduct.

5.  The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKA" will be assigned an RE Code of 3.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge and a change to the narrative reason for separation was carefully considered.  However, after examining his military record, the issues and document submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge or a change to the narrative reason for separation.  

2.  The record confirms 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.  It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  By the pattern of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by two Article 15s, a vacation of suspended punishment and nineteen negative counseling statements.

3.  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.

4.  The applicant requested a change to the narrative reason for separation.  However, Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  It identifies the SPD code of "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, for a pattern of misconduct.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  

5.  The applicant contends she is having issues moving up in her career without an honorable discharge.  However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

6.  The applicant further contends she should have been medically discharged because her shoulders were injured.  Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct.  

7.  Also, the service record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Furthermore, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication.  

8.  The applicant desires to receive VA benefits.  However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include 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.

9.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review         Date:  28 August 2013        Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify:  No

Counsel:  NA

Board Vote:
Character Change:  0	No Change:  5
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:			No
Change Characterization to:		No Change
Change Reason to:				No Change
Change Authority for Separation:		No Change
Change RE Code to:			No Change
Grade Restoration to:			NA
Other:						NA

Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions


ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20130004519



Page 2 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1