Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/05/09	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states in her issues through legal counsel: "That extreme family circumstances warrant a discharge upgrade, her character and accomplishments since 2003 must be considered, and that improper initial AWOL determination, and her unit's subsequent failure to facilitate mediation, further mitigated in favor of upgrading her discharge.  Her main reason for seeking the instance upgrade is to clear her good name and preserve her opportunities for advancement in the future.  She is a woman of impeccable character, respected integrity and work ethic, and indomitable spirit.  She feels confident that the Board, after considering her extreme circumstance in this matter, will agree that she is not someone who should be equated with an Other Than Honorable Characterization." 

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 090629
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 090724   Chapter: 10       AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: 63d TC Co, Flushing, NY 

Time Lost: AWOL x 1 for 2331 days (030124-090530), apprehended.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  29
Current ENL Date: 030127    Current ENL Term: 365 Days  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 01 Mos, 25 Days Includes 43 days of excess leave (090612-090724)
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 08 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USAR-020719-030126/NA
Highest Grade: E2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Brooklyn, NY
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed









VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 11 June 2009, the applicant was charged with going absent without leave (AWOL) (030124-090530).
       
       On 11 June 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense.  Further, the applicant indicated she understood she could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits.  The applicant submitted a statement in her own behalf.  The unit commander recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
       
       On 16 July 2009, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.  Army policy states that although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.  

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues, and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  The applicant consulted with defense counsel, and voluntarily in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated or lesser-included offenses under the UCMJ.  
       
       The analyst noted that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and the applicant was aware of it prior to requesting discharge.  
       
       The applicant contends that extreme family circumstances were the cause of her failure to reintegrate with her unit, that her unit did not notify her of her mobilization and did not respond to her attempts to mitigate her AWOL status, and that her character, family devotion, and accomplishments in the community warrant her discharge being upgraded.  The applicant's contention in reference to extreme family circumstance was considered, however, the analyst determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.  The record of evidence does not demonstrate that she sought relief through her command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers.  
       
       
       
       
       
       Furthermore, 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 his issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that she was not notify by her unit of her mobilization.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity and she has not provided any documentation or further evidence in support of her request for an upgrade of her discharge.
       
       The analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined with the application and in the documents with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  Further, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  
       
       Additionally, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       
       In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 12 September 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel:  [ redacted ]

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, Discharge Orders, dated 20 July 2009, Letter in Support of Requested Discharge Upgrade, dated 5 May 2011, Army Civilian Acquired Skills Program (ACASP) documentation, AWOL Letter, dated 14 March 2003, Daily Planner Notations, dated 21-26 March 2003, Character Letters of Support, Divorce Judgment, dated July 2003, and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review.

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing her testimony, and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted to deny relief.











        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 1    No change 4
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA



































Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20110010215
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 4 pages