RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            27 MAY 2004                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003098135

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Melvin Meyer		Chairperson	
	Ms. Regan Smith		Member	
	Mr. Thomas O'Shaughnessy		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:  

1.  In effect, the applicant requests that her discharge under honorable conditions (general) be upgraded to honorable.  She also requests that her DD 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show that she served in her primary specialty of 14T10 (Item 11 of that form), that she was awarded the Army Service Ribbon and the National Defense Service Medal   (item 13), that item 14 show the military course that she completed, that item 15a be corrected to show that she did contribute to post-Vietnam era Veteran's Educational Assistance Program, and that item 17 be corrected to show that she was not provided a complete dental exam and all appropriate dental services and treatment within 90 days prior to her separation.

2.  The applicant states that much of the information was omitted from her       DD Form 214.  She also states that there was not enough evidence that she used illegal drugs.  She did not have a positive urinalysis [for drugs] when she was tested, and there was no other testimony indicating that she used illegal drugs.  She states that most of her counselings she had were something every Soldier in training encounters at least once.  She states that she was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, not 14-12c as indicated on her DD Form 214. 

3.  The applicant provides copies of character references, a copy of her DD Form 214, a copy of a graduation certificate from the Air Defense Artillery School, copies of certificates she received, a copy of a document showing her test scores, a copy of a document showing her SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test) scores, and a copy of a photograph of a church rally. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Army for four years on 9 August 2001.  Her records contain no information prior to 28 May 2002, when she signed a security briefing form.  That form shows that she was assigned to A Battery, 1st Battalion, 56th Air Defense Artillery Regiment at Fort Bliss, Texas, where she was apparently undergoing advanced training.  

2.  She was counseled on numerous occasions for minor infractions of discipline and conduct, to include violation of a contraband policy (having a cell phone in her possession), having an unsecured and unkept room, lack of motivation and disrespect to a noncommissioned officer, lack of self-discipline, not at appointed place of duty in two instances, and failure to maintain her personal area.

3.  An Air Defense Artillery School certificate shows that the applicant graduated from the Patriot Launching Station Enhanced Operator/Maintainer Course on     13 August 2002. 
4.  On 13 August 2002 the applicant was interviewed by a special agent of the CID (Criminal Investigation Division) at Fort Bliss.  She made a sworn statement admitting to using cocaine. 

5.  On 22 August 2002 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for failure to go to her appointed place of duty and for dereliction of duty. 

6.  The applicant was "flagged" on 28 August 2002. 

7.  A 30 August 2002 counseling form shows that she admitted to using cocaine during questioning by a CID agent.  

8.  On 2 October 2002 the applicant's commanding officer notified her that he was initiating action to separate her from the Army for a pattern of misconduct under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b.  The applicant consulted with counsel and stated that she had been advised of the basis for the contemplated action to discharge her for a pattern of misconduct, its effects, the rights available to her, and the effect of any action taken by her in waiving her rights.  She declined to submit a statement in her own behalf.  She stated that she understood the nature and consequences of the general discharge that she might receive.

9.  The applicant's commanding officer recommended to the separation authority that the applicant be separated from the Army with a general discharge.  On      10 October 2002 the separation authority approved the recommendation.  

10.  The applicant was discharged on 10 October 2002.  The entry in item         11 (Primary Specialty (List number, title and years and months in specialty)) contains the word, "NONE."  The entry in item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized), contains the word, "NONE."  The entry in item 14, Military Education, contains the word, "NONE."  The entry in item 15a (Member Contributed to …) is marked with a check in the "No" block.  The entry in item 17 (Member was Provided a Complete Dental …) is marked with a check in the "Yes" block.  The separation authority on her       DD Form 214 is shown as, "AR 635-200, PARA 14-12C(2)."  The applicant signed the DD Form 214 attesting to its accuracy. 

11.  Included with her application are a high school graduation certificate and a certificate honoring her service in the "Fellowship of Christian Athletes."

12.  Submitted with her application are character references from a high school teacher and a police officer from her hometown.  

13.  On 13 August 2003 the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), in an unanimous opinion, denied the applicant's request to upgrade her discharge.  It did, however, correct her DD Form 214 to show that she was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, and changed the separation code and reentry code accordingly.

14.  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, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a soldier discharged under this chapter.  However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the soldier’s overall record.

15.  Army Regulation 635-5 provides instructions for the preparation of the         DD Form 214.  It states in pertinent part, that the titles of all MOS (military occupational specialty) served for at least 1 year will be entered in item 11 of that form, and will include for each MOS the number of years and months served.  Do not count basic training and AIT (advanced individual training).
   
a.  Enter in item 14 the formal in-service training course successfully completed.  This information is to assist the Soldier in job placement and counseling; therefore, do not list training courses for combat skills.  Army Regulation 611-21 provides information concerning the major duties and physical demands of a Patriot Launching Station Enhanced Operator/Maintainer, MOS 14T, a career management field 14 (Air Defense Artillery) specialty, and states that an operator/maintainer supervises or serves in an air defense unit or as a member of an air defense activity engaged in operations or intelligence functions of liaison units.  Air Defense Artillery is a combat arms career management field.  
b.  Mark the box, "No" in item 15a (Member contributed to post-Vietnam…) for any Soldier who enlisted after 1985.

c.  Mark the appropriate block in item 17 concerning a dental exam and dental services and treatment.  Check the SF 603 (Health Record-Dental) for validity of exam and all appropriate treatment.

16.  The applicant's medical and dental records are not available to the Board.

17.  The Army Service Ribbon is awarded to members of the Army for successful completion of initial entry training.  Enlisted Soldiers will be awarded the ribbon upon successful completion of their initial MOS producing course.
18.  The National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 11 September 2001 and a date to be determined.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Notwithstanding the applicant's contentions, there is evidence that she used illegal drugs, by her own sworn admission on 13 August 2002.  

2.  Discharge proceedings were properly initiated because of the applicant's pattern of misconduct, as reflected in the evidence of record.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is more than fair considering her overall record of military service.  She could have received an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  Noted are the certificates that she received and the statements of her good character that she submitted with her request.  None of these factors warrant the relief requested.

3.  The errors that the applicant noted concerning the separation authority have been corrected by the Army Discharge Review Board.  This Board will not further address this matter.

4.  The entry, "NONE" in item 11 of her DD Form 214 is correct.  There is no evidence that she was awarded the MOS for which she trained, nor did she serve in that MOS.

5.  The entry, "NONE" in item 14 is correct.  The course that she completed is a combat skill course, a Patriot … operator/maintainer who serves in an air defense unit or activity, a combat arms career management field.   

6.  The box marked "No" in item 11 is correct and in accordance with the provisions of the governing regulation.

7.  The applicant's dental records are not available; consequently, the applicant's contention concerning dental treatment cannot be substantiated.  Regularity is presumed.  Therefore, her request to correct the mark in item 17 is not accepted.

8.  The applicant is entitled to award of the National Defense Service Medal and the Army Service Ribbon.  

BOARD VOTE:

__MM ___  __RS___  ___TO __  GRANT RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing award of the National Defense Service Medal and the Army Service Ribbon.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to upgrading the applicant's general discharge to honorable, and to correcting the entries in items 11, 14, 15a, and 17 of her DD Form 214.  

		_____Melvin Meyer________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003098135	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20040527	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.00	
2.	110.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.