1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 27 January 2017 b. Date Received: 13 February 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change of her narrative reason for discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that during her tenure in the military she was a military wife and Soldier alone with three kids, which made it difficult; especially after just coming from Afghanistan where she spent 15 months. While being in the Army she had this opportunity for her and her family to go to Germany and not only experience the culture but to experience a different way of life then what she had growing up. So while in Germany, she was part of the 2nd MI HHC, her time there was rather hard because they had their favorites, and she know a lot of Soldiers may say this but it is so true, it was getting to the point where she wasn't being taught her job. She knew her job as a human resource specialist, but being overseas her job had different paperwork that was required. Also she did get in trouble for a car accident, but her unit at the time had already placed her on 30 days suspension and extra duty. Then came a time where her husband ended up coming to Germany just so they could be close, and they initially thought he would get stationed where she was in Wiesbaden, but because of his MOS he ended up in Mannheim, which caused a major strain because he was never able to get off. So he ended up getting discharged because he couldn't go to the field because there was no one to watch their kids. Her husband at the time couldn't come to Wiesbaden to do so. So this incident is what caused her to be discharged for a pattern of misconduct, which she felt was more along the lines of a family care plan issue. She prays that someone would out of the goodness of their heart look at this letter and understand that yes she made mistakes, but she deserves a second chance. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 28 May 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, and a prior period of honorable service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (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: 1 December 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 October 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: being detained again by the Military Police after being involved in a car accident and driving without a proper USAREUR license on 8 July 2011; Being counseled for failing to be at her appointed place of duty and making a false official statement on 11 July 2011; and Receiving a Field Grade Article 15 on 29 August 2011 for child endangerment after transporting her child without proper seatbelts or restraints (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 19 October 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 31 October 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 2 March 2009 / 6 year b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 28 / HS Graduate / 88 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 4 years, 3 months, 5 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 27 August 2007 to 1 March 2009 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Afghanistan (24 April 29008 to 18 July 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ACM-CS, ASR, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 26 January 2011, shows the applicant was the subject of investigation for child endangerment and traffic violation other failure to secure child in an approved restraint. Military Police Report, dated 8 July 2011, shows the applicant was the subject of investigation for traffic accident: inattentive driving; allowing an unlicensed individual to operate an USAREUR plate vehicle; and operating an USAREUR plated vehicle without an valid USAREUR driver's license. FG Article 15, dated 29 August 2011 for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 8 July 2011, being derelict in the performance of his duties by willfully failing to maintain a valid USAREUR license while operating a vehicle on 8 July 2011, with the intent to deceive, made to SPC F.T., an official statement, to wit; "He had been placed on quarters," or words to that effect which statement was totally false on 8 July 2011, and while she was responsible for the care of C.N.S., a child under the age of 16 years, endangered the safety of the child by transporting him in a vehicle without a seatbelt or proper restraints. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $750 pay (suspended), and 7 days extra duty (suspended). Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 15 September 2011, shows that the applicant could understand participate in administrative proceedings, appreciate the difference between right and wrong, and met medical retention requirements. It was noted that the applicant was cleared for separation in accordance with AR 635-200. Two negative counseling statements for acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application. 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. 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. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, and pattern of misconduct. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKA" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change of her narrative reason for discharge. 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 was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635- 200 with a general (under honorable conditions discharge). The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct," and the separation code is "JKA." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant seeks relief contending that her discharge should have been as a result of a family care plan issue and not for a pattern of misconduct. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support that her discharge should have been as a result of a family care plan issue and not for a pattern of misconduct. In fact, the applicant's Article 15 and negative counseling statements justify a pattern of misconduct. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. It should be noted by regulation, an under other than honorable condition (UOTHC) discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of a pattern of misconduct. It appears the applicant's generally good record of service was the basis for her receiving a GD instead of the normal UOTHC discharge. 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 his overall service record 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 28 May 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, and a prior period of honorable service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: 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 AR20170002264 1