1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 June 2016 b. Date Received: 16 June 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade to her characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant did not submit any issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 September 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: Misconduct / AR 635-200, Chapter 14, SEC II / JKB / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 5 November 2004 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 26 October 2004 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for her discharge; on 9 August 2004, she was involved in a verbal dispute with S.B., which led to a physical altercation. She shoved Ms. B. and punched her in the eye. She damaged walls and windows and broke several items in the home. Further, jewelry (valued at about $1,400.00) was discovered missing from Ms. X's residence and the jewelry was later found in the front floorboard of her vehicle. She pled guilty and was convicted of domestic assault in the 4th degree, criminal mischief in the 2nd degree, and larceny. For the domestic assault and criminal mischief offenses, she was sentenced to serve thirty (30) days of confinement, with eleven days suspended for two years, and with credit for 19 days of time served. For the larceny offense, she was sentenced to serve six (6) months of confinement, with five months and eleven days suspended for two years, and with credit for 19 days of time served. The judge ordered that both sentences were to be served concurrently. She is pending domestic violence charges involving Ms. X. in the state of Tennessee. In addition to this civil conviction, in September of 2004, she was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for eleven specifications of failure to report and four specifications of dereliction of duty. She received a FG Article 15, and was reduced from SPC / E-4 to PVT / E-1, forfeited $596 pay for two months, ordered to perform extra duty for 45 days and restricted for 45 days (suspended). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 26 October 2004 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 27 October 2004 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 18 April 2002, / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 years / HS Graduate / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92A10, Automated Logistical Specialist / 2 years, 5 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, 28 February 2003 to 3 February 2004 f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated September 2004, for without authority, fail to go at the prescribed time to her appointed place of duty x11 (22 April 2004, 24 June 2004, 25 June 2004, 1 July 2004, 9 July 2004 x3, 12 July 2004 x2, 14 July 2004 x2); she knew of her duties and was derelict in the performance of those duties in that she willfully failed to wear the correct uniform to PT formation, as it was her duty to do (22 March 2004 x2, 23 March 2004); and she was derelict in the performance of those duties in that she willfully failed to prepare her Class A uniform for inspection, as it was her duty to do (21 April 2004); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $596 pay for two months, extra duty for 45 days and restricted for 45 days (suspended). An approved Bar to Reenlistment Certificate, dated 27 October 2004. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL for 7 days, 18 September 2004 to 24 September 2004, mode of return unknown; and confinement military authorities for 25 days, 24 September 2004 to 19 October 2004. Total lost time is 43 days. However, the period of AWOL is not annotated on the DD Form 214 block 29 dates of time lost during this period. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages). 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade to her characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant's record of service and her application were carefully reviewed. 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. By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. 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 did not submit any issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board. 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 6 September 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 AR20160011379 2