IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms.

      BOARD DATE:  	17 April 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120022546
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.




      
      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions discharge to general, under honorable conditions or fully honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she cannot change her decision that she made at age 21, but feels that she has become an honorable person who deserves reconsideration.  While in basic training, she had several medical issues that hindered her performance, which created frustration that led to her going AWOL.  She had shin splints, swollen knees, a pulled groin muscle, and a stress fracture in the third metatarsal on her right foot that completely broke.  She graduated with a cast on her right leg right before Christmas and was granted one extra week of leave due to her injuries but when she returned to Ft. Jackson, her battalion was shut down.  She wandered around in the middle of the night until she saw a light at another battalion.  They provided her a place to stay until she could contact her drill sergeants.  After a few days at the battalion, a drill sergeant picked her up, took her to her old company to get her sea bag and then dropped her off at the other battalion, telling her “good luck.”  She was very frustrated because she did not know where to go and what to do.  She went to the hospital and had her cast removed and was told by the doctor that the bone in her foot healed “crooked,” which caused a lot of pain.  She expressed her frustration to the doctor and her surrogate first sergeant.  They both asked why she come back from Christmas leave.  That was when she decided to go AWOL, which was in January 1998.  In April of 1998, she reported to Fort Knox to turn herself in.  She knows she made a mistake and handled it poorly.  She knows now that she was not ready emotionally, mentally or physically to handle the situation appropriately at the age of just having turned 21.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	10 December 2012
	b.	Discharge Received:	Under Other than Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	3 September 1998
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, 
			Chapter 10/ KFS / RE-4
	e.	Unit of assignment:	Company B, 2nd Battalion, 39th Infantry Regiment, 
			Fort Jackson, SC
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	11 July 1997 / 8 years 
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	9 months, 7 days
	h.	Total Service:	11 months, 20 days
	i.	Time Lost:	63 days, AWOL, surrendered to military authorities
	j.	Previous Discharges:	None
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-1
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	None
	m.	GT Score:	NIF
	n.	Education:	GED
	o.	Overseas Service:	None
	p.	Combat Service:	None
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	None
	r.	Administrative Separation Board: 	No
	s.	Performance Ratings:	None
	t.	Counseling Statements:	NIF
	u.	Prior Board Review:	No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve on 11 July 1997 for a period of 8 years.  She was 20 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED).  There is no record of any acts of valor or significant achievements.  She completed 9 months and 7 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  

2.  The DD Form 214 indicates that on 3 September 1998, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  Further, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS (i.e., in lieu of trial by court-martial) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 3.

3.  The applicant’s record does not show any record of actions under the UCMJ; however, the DD Form 214 shows 63 days of unauthorized absences or time lost.

4.  There is no record of any discharge orders.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

DA Form 4187, dated 20 March 1998, which shows the applicant surrendered to military authorities on 18 March 1998 from her DFR status. 

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided DD Form 214 for service under current review; Orders, dated 10 July 1998, showing her being released from her assigned unit; Orders, dated 15 November 1998, showing that she is discharged from USAR, effective 31 August 1998, with an uncharacterized service. 

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant states, in effect, that she is now 35 years old; earned a Bachelor’s degree in Criminal Justice; and working on her Master’s in Social Work at a university while employed as a social worker.  She owns her home; has no criminal background; is a responsible and respectable single mother of a son; and feels she is a good person and a productive citizen.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 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.  

2.  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.  

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s available military records, the issues and documents submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the Army.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge.  Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

3.  The applicant's contentions were carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service.  Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs.  This presumption is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity in this case and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge.  

4.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance, it is her responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record.  The applicant will need to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence (i.e., discharge packet) sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration.

5.  The applicant contends she is entitled to an upgrade of her discharge because of mitigating circumstances which contributed to her misconduct.  Specifically, her medical issues resulted in her discharge.  While the applicant may believe her medical issues was the underlying cause of her misconduct, 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.  In addition, the applicant’s contention regarding her medical issues that contributed to her discharge from the Army, the service record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate her misconduct that led to her discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication.  

6.  The applicant contends that since leaving the Army she has completed a Bachelor’s degree, currently working on her Master’s, and employed as a social worker.  The applicant’s post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears 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.  In addition, the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge.  However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings.  The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

7.  The applicant also contends that she was young and immature at the time of the discharge.  The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

8.  Therefore, based on the available evidence and the presumption of government regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief.







SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: 	Records Review	Date:   17 April 2013        Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  0	No Change:  5
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		No
Change Characterization to:	No Change
Change Reason to:		No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	N/A
Change RE Code to:	N/A
Grade Restoration to:	N/A
Other:	N/A



















Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions


ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20120022546



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1