IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	23 September 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006303
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing her testimony and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include her combat service and testimony, as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.  The Board determined the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it




      
      
      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 her under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, her discharge was not an accurate representation of her service in the U.S. Army Reserves.  She is a veteran of the war in Iraq and served with meritorious honors.  Her discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident and a miscommunication during her 15 years of service with no other adverse action.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			26 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:			Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				12 October 2011
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		NIF, AR 135-175
e. Unit of assignment:				U.S. Army Reserve Training Support Division 							East, Fort Meade, MD
f. Current Entry Date/Term:			USARCG, 11 September 2005, NIF
g. Current Term Net Active Service:		6 years, 1 month, 2 days
h. Total Service:				22 years, 9 months, 12 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			USAR-(890120-900516)/NA									ADT-(900517-900808)/UNC									USAR-(900809-970212)/HD								 	ARNG-(970213-980822/HD									ARNG-(980823-990601/HD									USARCG-(990602-040212)/NA									OAD-(040213-040320)/HD										OAD (040321-050910)/HD										   (Concurrent Service)
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			O-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		91B Tank Automotive Material Management
m. GT Score:					NA
n. Education:					BA Degree
o. Overseas Service:				Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:				Kuwait/Iraq (040504-050601)
q. Decorations/Awards:			JSCM, ARCAM, NDSM-2, GWOTEM, 								GWOTSM, AFRM-W/”M” DEV, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		Yes
s. Performance Ratings:			Yes
t. Counseling Statements:			No
u. Prior Board Review:				No



SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the US Army Reserve on 20 January 1989, for a period of 8 years; she was 18 years old at the time.  She was ordered to initial active duty training on 17 May 1990, and after completion she returned to her unit.  She enlisted in the Army National Guard on 13 February 1997 for three years.  She received an honorable discharge.   She was commissioned in the ARNG as a 2LT at the age of 27.  She served honorably until her discharge on 1 June 1999.  Her record shows she was ordered to active duty on 13 February 2004.  Her last enlistment in the USAR was on 21 March 2004, for a period of 3 years.  Again, she was ordered to active duty, served a combat tour and earned several awards including a JSCM, ARCAM and an AFRM-W/”M” Device.  She was assigned to the US Army Reserve Training Support Division East, Fort Meade, MD when the separation action was initiated.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

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

2.  The available evidence in the record indicates that on 14 September 2011, DA, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Fort Knox, KY, Orders number D-09-115315, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 12 October 2011, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

3.  The record contains a properly constituted order which indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-175, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.   

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

The record contains two Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs) covering the periods 29 June 2004 through 1 May 2005 and 2 May 2005 through 10 September 2005, which rated the applicant as “Best Qualified.”

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, three DA Forms 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Reports), DA Form 1559 (Inspector General Action Request), and two Letters of recommendation.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any with the application.


REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

Army Regulation 135-175, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of officers from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), except for officers serving on active duty or active duty training exceeding 90 days.   Specific categories include substandard performance of duty, moral or professional dereliction, in the interest of national security, as a result of trial by court martial, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or absence without proper authority from unit training.  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.

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 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 Reserve.  However, the record shows that on 14 September 2011, DA, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Fort Knox, KY, Orders number D-09-115315, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 12 October 2011, with an under other than honorable conditions 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 contention regarding her discharge not being an accurate representation of her service in the US Army Reserve was carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination as to the merits of this contention.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted.  

5.  The applicant further contends she is a veteran of the war in Iraq and served with meritorious honors.  The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of her service were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to overcome the characterization of service under review.

6.  The applicant also contends her discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident and miscommunication during her 15 years of service with no other adverse action.  The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention.  There is no evidence in the available record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that her misconduct was an isolated incident.  The applicant’s statements alone does not substantiate her misconduct was an isolated incident. 

7.  It is the applicant’s 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.

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

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Personal Appearance  Date: 23 September 2013  Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify:  Yes

Counsel:  Yes

Witnesses/Observers:  Yes

DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE:

1.  The applicant submitted the following additional documents:

    a.  American Legion Brief
    b.  Award & citation narratives
    c.  Various letters of recommendation
	d.  Iraq Policy and Operation Group PD
	e.  Various emails
	f.   Master of Business Administration Diploma
    g.  Joint Service Commendation Medal

In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing.



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

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new Discharge Order:  		Yes
Change Characterization to:  		Honorable
Change Reason to:  			No Change
Change Authority for Separation:  	No Change
Change RE Code to:  			No Change
Grade Restoration to:  			NA
Other:  To:  ARBA Promulgation Team, Arlington, VA			           23 September 2013

      The Army Discharge Review Board, under the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553, in the case of the applicant named in page 1, directs the ARBA Promulgation Team, Arlington, VA, to issue a new discharge order to the applicant which reflects the following directed changes:

	[ x ] Change characterization of discharge to Honorable



















	


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)		AR20130006303



Page 2 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1