IN THE CASE OF:   Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	19 June 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006203
___________________________________________________________________________

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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to fully honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she came back from work one day and found her ex-husband in bed with another woman.  She had family issues related to the care of her children that created her undue stress.  She was under medications which made her sleepy and it was very hard for her to wake up and go to work.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		27 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions	
c. Date of Discharge:			14 October 2005
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, Chapter 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			Rear Det, 7th Sqdn, 10th Cav Rgt, Fort Hood, TX
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	7 October 2003, 4 years 	
g. Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 11 months, 28 days
h. Total Service:			1 year, 11 months, 28 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None	
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	88M10, Motor Transportation Operator
m. GT Score:				94
n. Education:				HS Equivalency
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 7 October 2003, for a period of four years.  She was 25 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency.  Her record does not contain any meritorious achievements or awards.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The record shows that on 16 September 2005, 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 pattern of misconduct, for the following offenses:

      a. Failed to report to her designated place of duty on numerous occasions
      b. Showed disrespect to a commissioned officer on numerous occasions
      
2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 19 September 2005, 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 commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 27 September 2005, 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 was discharged from the Army on 14 October 2005, for a pattern of misconduct, under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, with an SPD code of JKA and an RE code of 3.

6.  The applicant’s record does not show unauthorized absences or time lost.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

One negative counseling statement, dated 1 August 2005, for failing to report to her designated place of duty.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

The applicant provided a self-authored statement and a medical document with her application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None 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 her discharge characterization was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge.

2.  The record confirms 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 an honorable discharge.  The applicant’s commander indicated the applicant failed to report to her place of duty on numerous occasions and showed disrespect to a commissioned officer on several occasions as well.

3.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that her service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  

4.  The applicant contends that she was unjustly discharged because she had family issues and was a single parent  that created undue stress  for which she was given medications which made her sleepy and unable to come to work on time.  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.  Moreover, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with her overall service record.  

5.  The applicant’s record contains documentation which indicates she was diagnosed with a depressive disorder; however, a careful review of the entire record reveals this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  The record shows that on 16 August 2005, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which determined she was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong.  It appears the applicant’s chain of command further determined that although she was suffering from a depressive disorder, she knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation.  

6.  The 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:  Records Review	  Date:  19 June 2013	Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

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)		AR 20130006203		

Page 5 of 5 pages



ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1