IN THE CASE OF: Ms. BOARD DATE: 18 March 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140005537 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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 allowed her personal life to affect her judgment and ultimately ended her career. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 24 March 2014 b. Discharge received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 23 August 1999 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Unsatisfactory Performance, Chapter 13 AR 635-200, JHJ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: Alpha Battery, 5-7th Air Defense Artillery, Hanau, GE f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 30 July 1997, 6 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 24 days h. Total Service: 4 years, 9 months, 9 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: RA (941115-970729)/HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 14T10, Patriot Missile Crewmember m. GT Score: 105 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Germany/Southwest Asia p. Combat Service: Saudi Arabia (specific dates NIF) q. Decorations/Awards: AAM, AGCM, NDSM, SWASM-W/1 BSS, ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: No t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 November 1994, for a period of 3 years. She was 21 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. She was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 14T10, Patriot Missile Crewmember. She reenlisted on 30 July 1997, for a period of 6 years and was 23 years old at the time. She earned an AAM and an AGCM; and achieved the rank of SPC/E-4. She was serving in Germany when her discharge was initiated. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 14 July 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance. Specifically for the following offenses: a. failing to take care of her family, b. failing to maintain her assigned equipment to standard, c. failing to report to her place of duty on several occasions, d. failing to maintain accountability of her weapon while in the field, and e. being involved in a traffic accident due to her negligence. 2. The unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of her rights. 3. On 19 July 1999, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and indicated she intended to submit a statement on her own behalf (which is not contained in the available record). The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. 4. On 30 July 1999, 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 23 August 1999, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 6. The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences, time lost, negative counseling statements or any actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: The record did not contain any other relevant information regarding the discharge. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, self-authored statement, honor society certificate, two president list letters, college transcript, character statement, two service recognition certificates, several performance appraisal documents, DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), four certificates of appreciation/recognition, Ninth Judicial Circuit Court document (three pages), DD Form 214, and a X-Ray Eagle performer letter. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant stated she is employed by the Department of Homeland Security as a Federal Security Officer for the past eleven years. She is also a student at Seminole State College majoring in sociology and homeland security; and for two semesters she was on the president’s list for achieving a 3.75 grade point average or higher. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. 2. Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of her characterization of service was carefully considered. 2. After examining the applicant’s record of service, her military records, the documents and the issue submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to honorable for the following reasons: a. Overall length and quality of the applicant’s service: the applicant served 2 years, and 24 days of her contract for the period of service under review. At the time of her discharge the applicant had completed 4 years, 9 months, and 9 days of active service, thus the preponderance of her service was honorable. The record confirms she received an AAM and an AGCM. b. Combat Service: the record also confirms the applicant served a combat tour in Saudi Arabia. c. Post Service Accomplishments (i.e., the applicant has been employed by Homeland Security as a TSA security officer for eleven years; attended college and made the president’s list two consecutive semesters). 3. This recommendation was made after full consideration of all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh and as a result, it is now inequitable. 4. In view of the foregoing, the analyst recommends the Board grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. BOARD DETERMINATION AND DIRECTED ACTION After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 18 March 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 2 No Change: 3 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) AR20140005537 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1