IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  21 July 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140020390 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests correction of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show the characterization of her service was honorable.

2.  The applicant states that she served honorably on active duty from 13 March 2006 to 21 August 2006.  She adds that she was never disciplined under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) nor was she ever court-martialed.

   a.  She states that upon completion of advanced individual training (AIT) she was issued a DD Form 214.  She noticed the characterization of her service was "dishonorable."  She brought this to the attention of her drill sergeant who forwarded a request for correction of her DD Form 214.

   b.  She received a corrected DD Form 214 that indicated the characterization of her service was "honorable."  However, she subsequently lost the majority of her military papers, including the corrected DD Form 214.

   c.  She attempted to enlist in the U.S. Army and the recruiter brought to her attention the characterization of her service recorded on the DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States) and her DD Form 214.


CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG) of the United States (ARNGUS) and Missouri ARNG (MOARNG) on 6 January 2006, in the grade of rank of private first class/pay grade E-3, for a period of 6 years with a military service obligation (MSO) of 8 years.

3.  Military Entrance Processing Station, Kansas, City, MO, Orders 6018041, dated 18 January 2006, ordered the applicant to initial active duty for training (ADT) on 14 March 2006 for a period of 16 weeks to complete basic combat training at Fort Jackson, SC, and AIT at Fort Lee, VA.

   a.  Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center, Fort Jackson, SC, 
Orders 090-305, dated 31 March 2006, attached the applicant to Company L, 262nd Quartermaster Battalion, 23rd Quartermaster Brigade, Fort Lee, VA, effective 27 May 2006, to train in military occupational specialty (MOS) 92Y (Unit Supply Specialist).

   b.  Headquarters, U.S. Army Combined Arms Support Command, Fort Lee, VA, Orders 165-00394, dated 14 June 2006, awarded the applicant MOS 92Y1O, effective 24 July 2006 (or upon completion of training).

4.  A DD Form 214 shows the applicant entered active duty this period on 
13 March 2006, she was released from ADT on 21 August 2006, and transferred to a MOARNG unit based on completion of required active service.

   a.  She had completed 5 months and 9 days of net active service this period.

   b.  Item 24 (Character of Service) shows the entry "DISHONORABLE."

5.  A DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) shows the applicant was promoted to specialist/pay grade E-4 effective 13 July 2007.

6.  An NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) shows the applicant enlisted in the ARNGUS and MOARNG on 6 January 2006, was honorably separated on 5 January 2012, and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement) to complete her MSO.  She completed 6 years of total service during this period.

7.  Headquarters, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Fort Knox, KY, Orders D-01-400241, dated 7 January 2014, honorably discharged the applicant from the USAR effective 7 January 2014.

8.  A review of the applicant's military personnel records for the period of service under review failed to reveal evidence of any disciplinary actions, adverse information, or record of court-martial.  In addition, there is no evidence in her  record that a corrected DD Form 214 was prepared and filed showing she received an honorable discharge as she claimed in her application. 

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), in effect at the time of the applicant's separation from active duty, set policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the force while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Soldiers for a variety of reasons.

   a.  Chapter 3 (Character of Service/Description of Separation), paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  Only the honorable characterization may be awarded a Soldier upon completion of his/her period of enlistment or period for which called or ordered to active duty or ADT.

   b.  Chapter 3, paragraph 3-10, provides that a Soldier will be given a dishonorable discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general court-martial.  The appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.

10.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations – Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed policies and procedures regarding separation documents.  It established standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  

   a.  It stated the purpose of a separation document was to provide the individual with documentary evidence of his or her military service at the time of separation.  

   b.  It shows for item 24, in pertinent part, the correct entry is vital since it affects a Soldier's eligibility for post-service benefits.  Characterization or description of service is determined by the directive(s) authorizing separation.  The entry must be one of the following:

* HONORABLE
* UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)
* UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS
* BAD CONDUCT
* DISHONORABLE
* UNCHARACTERIZED

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends item 24 of her 21 August 2006 DD Form 214 should be corrected to show the characterization of her service was honorable.

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant enlisted in the ARNGUS and MOARNG on 6 January 2006.   

   a.  The applicant was ordered to ADT on 13 March 2006.

   b.  She successfully completed training and was awarded MOS 92Y.
   
   c.  She was released from ADT on 21 August 2006 based on completion of required active service and transferred to a MOARNG unit.

3.  The evidence of record shows that only the honorable characterization may be awarded a Soldier upon completion of his/her period for which called or ordered to ADT.  Thus, it is concluded that the applicant's service during the period of service under review should be characterized as "honorable."

4.  Therefore, in view of the foregoing, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant's DD Form 214 to show her character of service during the period of service under review was honorable.


BOARD VOTE:

___x____  ___x____  ___x____  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

   a.  voiding the 21 August 2006 DD Form 214 that is under review in this case, and
   
   b.   issuing a new DD Form 214 for the period of service from 13 March 2006 through 21 August 2006, with item 24 showing the entry "HONORABLE."




      _______ _   x_______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140020390



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140020390



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1