IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	29 January 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130018643
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

1.  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 to be 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 her general, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable conditions.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, her discharge was inequitable because she was not provided a proper mental health evaluation or care; the traumatizing and extremely excessive punishment resulting from her court-martial; and personal bias and inappropriate religious opinions of the company commander.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			8 October 2013
b. Discharge Received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				16 December 2005
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200,
							Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4
e. Unit of assignment:				HSC, STB, 1st Cav Div, Ft. Hood, TX
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		30 April 2003, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:		2 Years, 7 Months, 17 Days
h. Total Service:				2 Years, 7 Months, 17 Days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		98J10 ELINT INTCP/Analyst
m. GT Score:					114
n. Education:					GED
o. Overseas Service:				Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:				Iraq (040225-050302)
q. Decorations/Awards:			ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTEM, 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 30 April 2003 for a period of 4 years.  She was 17 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  She served in Iraq, and earned the ARCOM.  She completed 2 years, 7 months, and 17 days of active duty service.


SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 5 December 2005, the commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c for being convicted at summary court-martial of wrongful use of Ecstasy (040612), and receiving a field grade Article 15 for wrongful use of marijuana.

2.  Based on the above serious offenses, the commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 6 December 2005, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 

4.  On 9 December 2005, the separation authority approved the proposed action and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  The applicant was separated on 16 December 2005, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKK, and an RE code of 4.                

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Summary Court-Martial, dated 12 June 2004, wrongfully used Ecstasy (040131-040203).  The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $597.00 pay, and 45 days of hard labor.

2.  Article 15, dated 7 November 2005, wrongfully used marijuana (050806-050906).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-2, forfeiture of $692.00 per month for two months (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG) 

3.  The applicant was counseled for probable cause to believe she was using drugs and for testing positive for marijuana.  
      
4.  CID Report of Investigation, dated 24 February 2004, into the applicant's use and possible distribution of Ecstasy.

5.  Report of Mental Examination, dated 27 June 2005.


EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293 and copies of medical treatment records.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were listed.

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, the documents 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.  The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a Soldier.  The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies.  By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of her service below that meriting an honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by a summary court-martial and an Article 15.  

3.  The applicant contends her discharge was inequitable because she was not provided a proper mental health evaluation or care; the traumatizing and extremely excessive punishment resulting from her court-martial; and personal bias and inappropriate religious opinions of the company commander.

	a.  Her official record shows she underwent a mental health examination on 27 June 2005, and it was within normal limits; she did not suffer from a psychiatric disease or defect that would cause significant defects in judgment or reliability; and, she denied suicidal/homicidal ideations.  She contends that upon her return from Iraq, she experienced intense feelings of paranoia, extreme emotional outbursts, she was unable to sleep, and had constant night terrors and anxiety attacks, and, turned to drugs to help her cope.  However, when she had the opportunity to present these symptoms to the examining psychologist, or to seek mental counseling and treatment, she failed to do so.  Further, it is noted that her first instance of misconduct associated with drug use, was prior to her deployment to Iraq.

	b.  The punishment imposed by the summary court-martial was within legal limits and equitable based on the finding of guilt for wrongful use of Ecstasy.

	c.  There is no corroborating evidence to support her contention that the unit commander subjected her to religious bias based on his own beliefs regarding abortion.  Even if true, the applicant's misconduct formed the basis for her discharge and there is no evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  

	d.  The applicant's medical records show her mental diagnosis has changed several times and she has been diagnosed with a major depressive disorder, post-partum depression, bipolar disorder, inadequate personality disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).   However, the service record contains no evidence of a Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  

4.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

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:  29 January 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)		AR20130018643



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1