IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	9 April 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130014112
___________________________________________________________________________

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 to be 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 other than honorable conditions discharge to general, under honorable conditions and a change to the narrative reason for discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, she made a mistake when she absented herself from her unit without authority.  She states there were family issues that contributed to her being AWOL.  Her father had to have open heart surgery (quadruple bypass) and was not doing well.  She contends she was a young and immature person that got scared and left her unit to be with her family.  She did not think things through before she left and was even more scared to return to her unit after hearing terrible things about Soldiers that go AWOL.  She states she loved the military and would reenlist if given the chance.  She states she has matured and regrets her actions on a daily basis.  
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			31 July 2013
b. Discharge Received:			Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				14 May 2008
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, AR 635-200,
KFS, RE-4
e. Unit of assignment:				B Company, 447th Signal Battalion, Fort 
Gordon, GA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		16 August 2007/6 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:		6 months, 6 days 
h. Total Service:				6 months, 6 days
i. Time Lost:					85 days
j. Previous Discharges:			None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-1
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		None
m. GT Score:					NIF
n. Education:					HS Letter
o. Overseas Service:				None
p. Combat Service:				None
q. Decorations/Awards:			None
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		NA
s. Performance Ratings:			NA
t. Counseling Statements:			NIF
u. Prior Board Review:				No



SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 August 2007, for a period of 6 years.  She was 18 years old at the time of entry with a high school letter.  She enlisted in the Army for the Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 25B, Information Technology Specialist.  She was in advanced individual training at Fort Gordon, Georgia, when discharge proceedings were initiated.  She completed 6 months and 6 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s disciplinary history includes accrual of 85 days of time lost for being AWOL from 21 January 2008 until she surrendered and returned to military control on 13 April 2008.

2.  On 17 April 2008, a court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for violating Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) based on the AWOL offense outlined in the preceding paragraph.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial and of the maximum permissible punishment under the UCMJ, of the possible effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions, and of the rights and procedures available to her.  Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.

3.  In her request for discharge, the applicant acknowledged that by submitting the request for discharge she was admitting she was guilty of the charge against her or of a lesser-included offense that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct discharge.  She also confirmed her understanding that if her request for discharge was approved, she could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  She further stated she understood that receipt of an under other than honorable conditions discharge could result in her being deprived of many or all Army benefits, her possible ineligibility for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration, and she could be deprived of her rights and benefits as a veteran under State and Federal laws.  The applicant confirmed she had no desire to perform further military service and did not submit a statement in her own behalf.  

4.  On 1 May 2008, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that she be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade and issued a UOTHC Discharge Certificate.  

5.  On 14 May 2008, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  The DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) she was issued shows she completed 6 months and 6 days of creditable active military service and accrued 85 days of time lost due to being AWOL.  The record also shows 27 days of excess leave from 18 April 2008 to 14 May 2008.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  DA Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 17 April 2008, reflects the applicant was charged with being AWOL from on or about 21 January 2008 until 14 April 2008.
2.  DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 21 January 2008, reflects the applicant’s duty status changed from present for duty (PDY) to AWOL on 21 January 2008.
      
3.  DA Form 4187, dated 20 February 2008, reflects the applicant’s duty status changed from AWOL to dropped from rolls (DFR) on 20 February 2008.
      
4.  DA Form 4187, dated 16 April 2008, reflects the applicant’s duty status changed from DFR to attached/PDY after she surrendered to military authorities on 14 April 2008.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an online application, dated 22 July 2013, and a DD Form 214. 

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any in support of her application.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for 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.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.

2.  Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member'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.

3.  Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  

4.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  It identifies the SPD code of "KFS" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.

5.  The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "KFS" will be assigned an RE Code of 4.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge and change to narrative reason was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge or change to the narrative reason for discharge.

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.  It also shows that after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

3.  The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance.  Her record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority and it does not support an upgrade to an honorable or a general discharge at this late date.  

4.  The applicant contends that she was very 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.

5.  The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service.  However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 4.  An RE code 4 constitutes a non-waivable disqualification, thus the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  

8.  Therefore, the reason and characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief.














SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review       Date:  9 April 2014       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)		AR20130014112



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1