IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	9 May 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130014722
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the analyst’s 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.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, she is requesting an upgrade so she can use her GI Bill.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		12 August 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			26 March 2002
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct, AR 635-200, 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3        
e. Unit of assignment:			HHD, 101st Forward Support Battalion, Fort Riley, 						KS
f. Enlistment Date/Term:		9 November 2000, 3 years 
g. Current Enlistment Service:	10 months, 25 days
h. Total Service:			10 months, 25 days
i. Time Lost:				172 days
j. Previous Discharges:		None 
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	92G10, Food Service Specialist
m. GT Score:				97
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			NIF
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, SWASM, ASR, KLM
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 9 November 2000, for a period of three years.   She was 25 years old at the time and a high school graduate.  When her discharge proceedings were initiated she was serving at Fort Riley, KS.  She did not have any significant achievements or meritorious awards and it is unknown if she served overseas.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The record shows that on 8 March 2002, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), specifically for being a deserter from on or about 30 June 2001 until on or about 20 December 2001. 

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 8 March 2002, the applicant waived consulting with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and indicated she would 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 8 March 2002, 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 on 26 March 2002, for misconduct (serious offense), under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, with an SPD code of JKQ and a RE code of 3.

6.  The applicant’s record shows she had 172 days of lost time.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  FG Article 15, dated 19 February 2002, for desertion (between 010630-011220).  The punishment imposed consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $552.00 pay per month for two months, and extra duty and restriction for 45 days.

2.  Negative counseling statement, dated 14 January 2002, for desertion/AWOL.    

3.  DA Forms 4187 with the following periods: 30 June 2001 (assigned not joined to AWOL), 26 December 2001 (dropped from rolls to present for duty), 4 January 2002 (AWOL to dropped from rolls), and 4 January 2002 (assigned not joined to AWOL).

4.  DD Form 616, Report of Return of Absentee, dated 20 December 2001, showing the applicant was AWOL from 1 July 2001 through 20 December 2001, until she surrendered.  

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

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


POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None stated 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.

ANALYST’S 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 service record 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 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 misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality 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 an upgrade of her discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill.  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.

5.  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:  9 May 2014       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)		AR20130014722



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1