IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	31 July 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130004521
___________________________________________________________________________

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 to her discharge from under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she loved her time in the Army.  She was diagnosed with depression while on active duty and faced many challenges that caused her to have hardships while serving.  She tried very hard to adjust to the changes and be the best Soldier she could be.  She requests that her discharge be upgraded to honorable because she maintained her Army core values at all times as a Soldier.  She finds herself in many life changing situations that would help her progress in a successful manner if her discharge was upgraded to honorable.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		4 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			10 March 2010 
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, 					JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			A Co, 703rd Bde SPT Bn, 4th BCT, 3rd Inf Div, Fort 						Stewart, GA 
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	29 August 2007, 3 years and 2 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 6 months, 11 days
h. Total Service:			5 years, 7 months, 23 days
i. Time Lost:				1 day
j. Previous Discharges:		USAR, 020502-050613/GD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	92W10, Water Treatment Specialist 
m. GT Score:				92
n. Education:				High School graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes	
u. Prior Board Review:			No




SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 August 2007 for a period of three years and 2 weeks.  She was 22 years old at the time of entry and was a high school graduate.  She served at Fort Stewart, GA.  She earned a NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, and completed 2 years, 
6 months, and 11 days of active duty service.  DD Form 214, Block 12e, total prior inactive service is incorrect; should be:  3 years, 1 month and 12 days.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  On 18 February 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b pattern of misconduct. Specifically for multiple counts of failure to report; disrespect towards Noncommissioned Officers; and AWOL for a period of one day. 

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

3.  On 24 February 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement on her own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 26 February 2010, 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 record shows one day of unauthorized absences.  This was based on the applicant being AWOL on 13 October 2009.

6.  The applicant was separated on 10 March 2010, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, Pattern of Misconduct, with an under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKA and an RE code of 3.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  An Article 15, on 4 December 2009, for being AWOL (091013-091014); the punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $699.00 for two months; 45 days extra duty; 45 days restriction (FG).
   
2.  Several counseling statements for multiple violations of failure to obey an order; FTR, insubordination towards a NCO; and for being AWOL. 




EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 27 February 2013, and a DD Form 214.  

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were provided by the applicant.   

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.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, her military records, and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

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 repeated incidents of serious misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  
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 contends that she faced many challenges that caused her hardships while serving.  However, she had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that she ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.  

5.  The applicant contends that she was diagnosed with depression which contributed to her discharge from the Army.  However, 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.  Further, 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.  

6.  Records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.

7.  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:  Record Review         Date:  31 July 2013          Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Board Vote:
Character  	Change:  1	No Change:  4
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 RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Change Authority for Separation:	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)		AR20130004521



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1