IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	24 July 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130004698
___________________________________________________________________________

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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, she would like an upgrade of her discharge for the purpose of being able to use her GI Bill benefits and reenlist.  She contends she was discharged for being in a bad home and having to leave with no money, phone or transportation.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			7 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				7 October 2010
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		NIF/AR 135-178
e. Unit of assignment:				HHC, 165th QM Grp, Fort Belvoir, VA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		27 October 2008, 8 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:		1 year, 11 months, 11 days
h. Total Service:				1 year, 11 months, 11 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			USAR-081027-081119/NA											IADT-081120-090513/UNC										    (Concurrent Service)
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		92G10, Food Service Operations Specialist
m. GT Score:					NIF
n. Education:					HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				None
p. Combat Service:				None
q. Decorations/Awards:			NDSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		No
s. Performance Ratings:			None
t. Counseling Statements:			None
u. Prior Board Review:				No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		

The applicant enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 27 October 2008 for       8 years.  She was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  She was ordered to active for initial active duty training (IADT) from 20 November 2008 to 13 May 2009.  She continued to serve in the USAR until her discharge on 7 October 2010.  Her record documents no acts of valor or significant achievements.  She completed 1 year, 11 months, and 11 days of military service.
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence shows the applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the United States Army Reserve.  

2.  The record shows that on 30 September 2010, Department of the Army Headquarters, 99th Regional Support Command, Fort Dix, NJ, Orders 10-273-00058 discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date 7 October 2010, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, under the provision of AR 135-178.  

3.  The applicant’s available service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Discharge Orders 10-273-00058, dated 30 September 2010.

2.  There are no negative counseling's or actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice in the available records.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 149 and a copy of a police report, dated 28 January 2010.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were provided with the application.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the U.S. Army while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted Soldiers for a variety of reasons. The separation policies throughout the different Chapters in this regulation promote the readiness of the Army by providing an orderly means to judge the suitability of persons to serve on the basis of their conduct and their ability to meet required standards of duty performance and discipline.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, and convictions by civil authorities.  

2.  The characterization is based upon the quality of the Soldier’s service, including the reason for separation and determined in accordance with standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty as found in the UCMJ, Army Regulations, and the time-honored customs and traditions of the Army.  The reasons for separation, including the specific circumstances that form the basis for the discharge are considered on the issue of characterization.
3.  Possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general, under honorable conditions, under other than honorable conditions, or uncharacterized if the Soldier is in entry-level status.  However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation.

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 record of service, her available military records, the documents and the issues 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 the former Soldier’s discharge from the U.S. Army Reserve.  However, the record shows that on 30 September 2010, Department of the Army Headquarters, 99th Regional Support Command, Fort Dix, NJ, Orders 10-273-00058 discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date 7 October 2010, with a general, under honorable condition discharge.

3.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity shall prevail, as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

4.  The applicant's contentions about being discharged for living in a bad home without money, phone or transportation were carefully considered.  However, a determination as to the merit of her contentions cannot be made because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown.  Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which 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 her contentions.  The applicant’s statement alone does not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge.  

5.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be her responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record.

6.  The applicant requests a change to the characterization of her service in order to reenlist and the opportunity to use her GI Bill benefits.  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.



7.  Furthermore, 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.

8.  Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of 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: 24 July 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:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Other:					NA











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)		AR20130004698



Page 2 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1