IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	27 September 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130005267
___________________________________________________________________________

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 to include the reentry eligibility (RE) code.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, her military records do not contain anything which would indicate her service should be anything except honorable.  She is a decorated disabled veteran who served honorably with no blemishes on her record.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date 		13 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			21 September 2009
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14, 						paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			HHD, 44th Medical Command, Fort Bragg, NC
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	6 July 2006, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	3 years, 2 months, 16 days
h. Total Service:			3 years, 2 months, 16 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	25U1P,Signal Support Systems Specialist
m. GT Score:				113
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (080916-090402)
q. Decorations/Awards:		AAM, NDSM, ICM-W/CS, 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 the Regular Army on 6 July 2006, for a period of 4years.  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) 25U1P, Signal Support Systems Specialist.  Her record also shows she served a combat tour, earned an AAM, and she achieved the rank of SPC/E-4.  She was serving at Fort `Fort Bragg, NC when her discharge was initiated.




SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 25 August 2009, 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 a pattern of misconduct, including conduct prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the unit.

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 17 August 2009, the applicant indicated she consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and would submit a statement on her behalf.  However, this memorandum was dated a week before she was notified of the pending separation action.  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 31 August 2009, 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 21 September 2009, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for 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 3 January 2009 for being derelict in the performance of her duties by negligently failing to maintain accountability of his assigned weapon (081230); the punishment consisted of reduction to E-3 (suspended), forfeiture of $250 pay, and extra duty for 14 days, (FG).

2.  On 25 February 2009, the suspension of punishment of reduction to E-3, was vacated for the new offense of without authority, failing to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty (090226).

3.  An Article 15, dated 4 March 2009 for without authority, leaving her appointed place of duty (090226); willfully disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer x 2 (SSG), (090226) and a (MSG, (090226); being disrespectful in deportment toward a (MSG, (090226); being disrespectful in language toward a (SSG), (090226); the punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $834 pay x 2 months (suspended), and extra duty for 45 days (FG).

4.  She received five negative counseling statements which were completed between            14 November 2008 and 26 February 2009 for failing to report/failing to maintain control of her weapon, failing to follow instructions, substandard behavior/substandard conduct and performance, reporting late for extra duty and failing to return to her place of duty.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293 and a DD Form 214.

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, paragraph 14-12b, 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 RE code was carefully considered.  However, after examining her 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 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.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by two Articles 15, a vacation of punishment, and five 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 to include the RE code.  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, pattern of misconduct.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  

5.  Further, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code.  An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Recruiters 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. 

6.  The applicant contends her military records do not contain anything which would indicate her characterization of service should be anything except honorable.  During the period of service under review the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of her service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline.  By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with her overall service record. 
7.  The applicant also contends she is a decorated disabled veteran whom served honorably with no blemishes on her record.  The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention she is a disabled veteran.

8.  Additionally, the applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of her service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge under review.

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

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review     Date:  27 September 2013     Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify:  NA

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  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:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
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)		AR20130005267



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1