1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 28 July 2016 b. Date Received: 8 August 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, her discharge does not accurately reflect her time in service. Her records reflect her true value as a Soldier on her evaluations, awards and recognitions. She states, her discharge was based on a small portion of time during her service, which does not equate to a true pattern of misconduct or warranting a general discharge. Based on her performance evaluations, promotions above peers and outstanding service, she should have been afforded a chance for rehabilitation. She states, during her service, she dedicated herself to physical and mental improvement and encouraged her Soldier's to do the same. She performed many additional duties and challenged herself by creating new battalion training program for SHARP, which was implemented as the Branch Policy. Additionally, she created her battalion's first half-marathon training program. After her separation, she continued to improve herself by attending college for a Nursing degree. She states, an upgrade of her discharge would truly reflect the kind of Soldier she was and not the one who her new command made her out to be. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 18 October 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 21 July 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 27 May 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On or about 18 February 2015, she violated a lawful command given by CPT B, to have no contact with SSG X. Between on or about 1 October 2014 and 15 December 2014, she violated the brigade threshold policy while in Al Dhafra by wrongfully being inside SSG X's room. On or about 20 December 2014, she made an official statement to CPT X, with the intent to deceive, that she had never entered SSG X's room. On or about 25 November 2014, she did behave herself with disrespect toward CPT X, her superior commissioned officer, by saying to him "This is bullshit", or words to that effect, and tearing up her counseling statement, then turning around and leaving him without being excused. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 28 May 2015, the applicant waived her rights to consult with a JAG officer. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 1 June 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 19 October 2012 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 26 / HS Graduate / 106 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 25C10 T2, Radio Operator Maintainer / 5 years, 9 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 9 November 2006 - 6 November 2007 / UNC Break in Service RA, 22 October 2009 - 18 October 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany / Afghanistan (19 February 2014 - 15 February 2015) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: 1 January 2013 - 31 December 2013 / Among The Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 3 December 2014, for disrespect toward CPT A (25 November 2014); derelict in the performance of her duties (between 24 and 28 November 2014). The punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $596 pay (suspended); extra duty and restriction for 14 days; and, an oral reprimand. FG Article 15, dated 16 April 2015, for willfully disobeying a lawful command (18 February 2015); for willfully disobeying a lawful order (between 1 October and 15 December 2014); and, for making a false official statement (20 December 2014). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4; forfeiture of $1,175 pay per month for two months (suspended); and, an oral reprimand. Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, with all allied documents listed in the supporting documentation information section of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: She states, she continued to improve herself by attending college for a Nursing degree. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): 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. Paragraph 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. 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 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, such that she should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends her discharge should be upgraded to reflect the Soldier she truly was and not the Solider her command made her out to be. However, 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. The applicant contends she was not afforded the opportunity for rehabilitation. However, AR 635-200, paragraph 1-16d(2), entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements, states the rehabilitative requirements may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier. The applicant contends that her discharge from the Army was based on an isolated period of service. Although a single incident or period of service, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends that she had good service which included a combat tour. 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. The applicant is to be commended for her accomplishments. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 18 October 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a new DD-214/Issue new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20160013365 1