1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 12 March 2018 b. Date Received: 30 October 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, would like to go to school and further an education and an upgrade would allow the applicant to utilize the GI Bill. The applicant served as an Automated Logistic Specialist and worked the majority of service outside of MOS as the companies' Orderly room clerk and legal clerk. The applicant excelled and was the go-to person for the first sergeant or anyone that may have needed assistance. The applicant took pride in the job and doing it the best possible. The applicant states that during service an incident occurred, where the applicant had to flee the scene, because the two year old daughter was being left at home alone unattended. The punishment was a court-martial, which the applicant served in agreement with the plea deal that included 15 days in jail. The applicant could have been retained, but the chain of command believed that they did not want anyone in their formation who had been to jail. The applicant admits it had a big impact because the applicant spent so much time trying to be a good example. The applicant believed all things happen for a reason and wishes to have handled the incident much better. The applicant states, the character statements provided, will reflect the applicant as a former Soldier and the goal was to show the most respect to the organization. The applicant is at a point in life, where now, if given the opportunity to receive a review of the records, wants to try. The applicant would like to finish a degree in psychology and possibly be able to become a counselor for those Soldiers, who go through events in their career that need someone to turn to when things seem to be spiraling. The mental health and the fairness of how Soldiers are treated is very important. In the applicant's experience, the applicant has witnessed many things that were an unfair bias by those imposing punishments, which affect one more than one would think. 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 diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood and Reaction to Severe Stress. The applicant is 80% service-connected; 70% for PTSD due to MST. In summary, although the applicant has a BH diagnosis, it is not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 July 2019, and by a 3-2 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 (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 28 November 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 October 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On or about 29 April 2016, she operated a passenger car in a reckless and unsafe manner, failing to stop at a steady red traffic signal, and driving at a rate of speed in excess of the posted speed limit. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 24 October 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 4 November 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 3 January 2013 / 4 Years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 96 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92A10, Automated Logistical Specialist / 3 years, 10 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: United States District Court Violation Notice, dated , reflects the applicant was charged with "speeding 47/30." Law Enforcement Report - Initial, dated 2 May 2016, reflects an investigation revealed that at 1631 hours, 29 April 2016, the Fort Stewart Police observed the applicant operating a white in color, vehicle traveling at an excessive rate of speed, verified by radar at 47 mph in a 30 mph zone. A traffic stop was conducted and a check of GCIC showed that the applicant's driver's license was suspended. The applicant became uncooperative and hostile, exiting her vehicle after being instructed to stay inside. The applicant then fled the scene in her vehicle at a high rate of speed. Fort Stewart Police pursued the applicant who continued westbound reaching speeds up to at or near 80 mph in a 30 mph zone. While fleeing, the applicant passed between other westbound vehicles in a dangerous/reckless manner. During the pursuit the applicant failed to stop for a steady red traffic signal at the intersection, going around other vehicles which were stopped at the red light. The applicant then proceeded southbound approaching Gate #7 where she passed another vehicle in a no passing zone (double yellow lines). The applicant continued south and exited post through Gate #7. Fort Stewart Police discontinued the pursuit after exiting through Gate #7. The Liberty County Sheriff's Office (LCSO) made contact with the applicant at her off post residence. Fort Stewart Police coordinated with the LCSO and the applicant's military unit to facilitate her surrender at the Fort Stewart Police Station. The applicant's driver's license was confiscated. The applicant was issued a post suspension of driving privileges memorandum (5 years), a CVB citation, further processed and released to her unit. Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial, dated 28 September 2016, reflects the applicant was charged with: Charge I: Article 111, UCMJ, the Specification: At or near Fort Stewart, GA, on or about 29 April 2016, on West 6th Street, adjacent to building #2916, did operate a vehicle, to wit: a passenger car, in a reckless manner by passing other vehicles in an unsafe manner, falling to stop at a steady red traffic signal, and driving at a rate of speed in excess of the posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour. The applicant was found guilty, consistent with the plea. Charge II: Article 134, UCMJ: Specification 1: Did, at or near Fort Stewart, GA, on or about 29 April 2016, drive a motor vehicle while her privilege to do so was suspended, In violation of Georgia Code, Section 40-5-121, assimilated into federal law by 18 U.S. Code Section 13. The applicant was found guilty, consistent with the plea. Specification 2: Did, at or near Fort Stewart, GA, on or about 29 April 2016, wrongfully hinder a law enforcement officer by fleeing the scene of a traffic stop, In violation of Georgia Code, Section 16-10-24, assimilated into federal law I by 18 U.S. Code Section 13. The applicant was found guilty, consistent with the plea. The sentenced adjudged: Confinement for 15 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 11 October 2016, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with: Reaction to severe stress. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DA Form 5111; DD Form 214; DD Form 293; DD Form 458; Law Enforcement Report; DD Form 2707-1; DD Form 2329; Service of DD Form 2329; DD Form 2707 DD; Form 2708; Facebook article. 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 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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 he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends she witnessed unfair bias from her chain of command. 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 that she had good service. 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 applicant contends that an upgrade of her discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. However, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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 26 July 2019, and by a 3-2 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 a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change 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 AR20180015578 4