IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	16 April 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130010870
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the characterization was improper.  The evidence indicates the applicant enlisted for 6 years with a Reserve unit and then 2 years in the IRR.  It appears that after the applicant had completed 6 years she was transferred to a non-unit category, which would have been to the IRR.  The applicant's USAR obligation was until 2006; the period from 2006-2008 being in the IRR under the terms of her enlistment contract.  It appears someone erroneously assigned her to another Reserve unit and she was subsequently discharged for unsatisfactory participation.  Based on this evidence, the applicant is entitled to relief as the discharge in 2007 was erroneous, and she should have received a separation at the expiration of her term of service in the IRR in 2008 that was honorable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.  This entails restoration of rank/grade to SPC/E-4.



      
      
      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 discharge from under other than honorable to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she would like an upgrade of her discharge for the purpose of insuring she does not lose her job or home.  She contends she was discharged from the USAR after obtaining 609 points and six years of service without notification.  She believes her record is in error as a result of a change in her expiration date of service to         30 April 2028.  She is sure her enlistment was a six by two from 2000-2006 and the IRR through 2008.  She is now facing the possibility of losing both her job and home if the error is not corrected.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		4 June 2013
b. Discharge Received:		Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			16 October 2007
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	NIF/135-178
e. Unit of assignment:			7243 IMSU (Enhanced), Las Vegas, NV
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	13 July 2000, 8 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	7 years, 3 months, 4 days
h. Total Service:			7 years, 3 months, 4 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		USAR-000713-001114/NA											ADT-001115-010531/HD											   (Concurrent Service)
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	91B10, Medical Specialist
m. GT Score:				NIF
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		ASR, ARCAM, CoA
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 13 July 2000, for a period of 8 years.  She was 21 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  She attended initial training (IADT), was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91B10, Medical Specialist.  The record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements.

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 United States Army Reserve.  

2.  The available evidence in the record indicates that on 16 October 2007, DA, HQS, Army Reserve Medical Command, Pinellas Park, FL, Orders Number 07-289-00033, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective 16 October 2007, with an UOTHC discharge.  The applicant was discharged under the provisions 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 07-289-00033, dated 16 October 2007.

2.  The applicant’s available record does not contain any recorded actions under the UCMJ or counseling statements.  

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an online application, a copy of her discharge orders, a DD Form 214 for a prior period of service, reassignment orders, dated 21 October 2004 and 7 December 2006, retirement points accounting system summary points inquiry/update, service school academic evaluation report (3), memorandum for award of the ARCAM, and documents from the National Personnel Record Center (i.e. AMHRR).

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 her discharge from the USAR.  However, the record shows that on 16 October 2007, DA, HQS, Army Reserve Medical Command, Pinellas Park, FL, Orders Number 07-289-00033, discharged the applicant from the USAR, effective 16 October 2007, with an UOTHC 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 contends her record is in error as a result of a change in her expiration date of service; she is sure her enlistment was a six by two from 2000-2006 and the IRR through 2008.  The applicant's contention was noted, the expiration term of service date noted on the applicant reassignment orders, dated 7 December 2006, indicating the applicant's expiration term of service as 30 April 2028 was incorrect.  The enlistment contract in the record shows the applicant enlisted on 13 July 2000 for a period of 8 years, therefore her expiration term of service should have been on or about 12 July 2008.  However, the record indicates the applicant was discharged prior to 12 July 2008, her correct service obligation date.

5.  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 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 a change to the characterization of service granted.  The applicant’s statements alone do 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.  

6.  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.

7.  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.

8.  After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the characterization was improper.  The evidence indicates the applicant enlisted for 6 years with a Reserve unit and then 2 years in the IRR.  It appears that after the applicant had completed 6 years she was transferred to a non-unit category, which would have been to the IRR.  The applicant's USAR obligation was until 2006; the period from 2006-2008 being in the IRR under the terms of her enlistment contract.  It appears someone erroneously assigned her to another Reserve unit to which she never reported, and was subsequently discharged for unsatisfactory participation.  Based on this evidence, the applicant is entitled to relief as the discharge in 2007 was erroneous, and she should have received a separation at the expiration of term of service in the IRR in 2008 that was honorable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.






SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review	       Date:  16 April 2014      Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: None

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 DD Form 214:		No
Issue a new Discharge Order:	Yes
Change Characterization to:	Honorable
Change Reason to:			NA
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		SPC/E-4
Other: TO: ARBA Promulgation Team. Arlington,                                     Date: 29 April 2014

     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.
           ( X  )	Restoration of grade to E-4/SPC












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)		AR20130010870



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1