1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 April 2018 b. Date Received: 27 July 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board will consider the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the stress level was extremely high and the applicant was in a bad mood and sad most of the time. The applicant alleges being sexually assaulted in the laundry room. The applicant desires to join the Army again. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate no BH diagnoses while on active duty. The applicant does not have any VA records available for review. In summary, the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 January 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. MST). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 5-3, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF, and a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to 1. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 12 October 2006 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 1 September 2006 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for her discharge; on 6 December 2005, she received a CG Article 15 for altering a sick call slip, DD Form 680, to state she had 48 hours of quarters instead of 24 hours; on 10 July 2006, she received another CG Article 15, for the following reasons; she was FTR for a 1900 meeting (February 2006); she disobeyed a lawful order x2 from SSG B. (9 May 2006 and 30 May 2006); she was disorderly (17 March 2006); and since her Article 15, she disobeyed a lawful order from 1SG F. (3) Recommended Characterization: The unit commander recommended a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. The intermediate commander recommended an Honorable discharge. (4) Legal Consultation Date: 4 September 2006 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 September 2006 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 29 July 2004 / 3 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 years / HS Graduate / 78 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist / 2 years, 2 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany / SWA / Iraq, 23 June 2005 to 1 August 2005 f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ICM; GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 6 December 2005, for, with intent to deceive, alter a record, an Individual Sick Slip, DD Form 680, which record was false in that "24 hours" was changed to "48 hours," and was then known by her to be so false (18 October 2005); reduction to PV2 / E-2, extra duty and restriction for 14 days. CG Article 15, dated 10 July 2006, for having received a lawful order from SSG B., a noncommissioned officer, to at ease, or words to that effect, and to go to guard duty, or words to that effect, an order which it was her duty to obey, did willfully disobey the same (30 May 2006), without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty (5 February 2006); having received a lawful order from SSG B., a noncommissioned officer, to spit out her gum, or words to that effect, an order which it was her duty to obey, did willfully disobey the same (9 May 2006); and being disorderly which conduct was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces (17 March 2006); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $297 pay for one month, extra duty for 14 days and restriction for 14 days (suspended). Applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct; initial and rehabilitative counseling. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); self-authored statement (three pages); and a DD Form 214. 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with 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 documented pattern of 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 seeks relief contending, her stress level was extremely high and she was in a bad mood and sad most of the time. The record of evidence does not demonstrate that she sought relief from stress through her command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. The applicant alleges being sexually assaulted in the laundry room. Although the applicant alleges that she was a victim of sexual assault during her military service, there is no evidence in her military records and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence supporting this contention. Therefore, this argument is not sufficient to support her request for an upgrade of her discharge. The applicant desires to join the Army again. Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. There was no basis to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 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 24 January 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. MST). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 5-3, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF, and a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to 1. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Secretarial Authority d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 5-3 e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JFF / RE-1 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 AR20180010566 1