IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	2 May 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130014355
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and notwithstanding the examiner’s Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length of service and the circumstances surrounding her AWOL (i.e., the Board does not condone her AWOL, but gave credibility to her account of sexual assault as the preceptor of her misconduct and a prime mitigator), and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  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 an upgrade of her discharge from under other than honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, she believes she should have an honorable discharge because of the incidents that occurred prior to her going AWOL; she felt there was no other option at the time and felt she was forced to go AWOL.  She reached out for help from her chain of command and was ignored.  She was forced to have sex numerous times; she now has nightmares, insomnia, stress, and paranoia issues due to this event.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		5 August 2013
b. Discharge Received:		Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			7 September 2001
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:			66th Military Police Company, 504th Military Police 						Battalion, Fort Lewis, WA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	1 July 1999, 5 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 25 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 25 days
i. Time Lost:				42 days
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	95B10, Military Police
m. GT Score:				112
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		No
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant was enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 July 1999, for a period of 5 years.  She was 18 years old at the time of entry and a HS Graduate.  She was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 95B10, Military Police.  Her record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements.  She was serving at Fort Lewis, WA when her discharge was initiated.


SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which indicates that on      30 November 2000 the applicant was charged with authority, absenting herself from her unit (AWOL) (001016-001127).

2.  On 1 December 2000, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser-included offense.  The applicant indicated she understood she could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits.  The applicant did not submit a statement on her behalf.  The unit commander recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 7 August 2001, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 

4.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 7 September 2001, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 10,             AR 635-200, by reason of in lieu of trial by court-martial, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of KFS and an RE code of 4.

5.  The applicant’s record of service indicates 42 days of time lost for being AWOL from         16 October 2000 until she surrendered on 27 November 2000.  Also, she had 281 days of excess leave from 1 December 2000 until 9 September 2001.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  The record contains a DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), dated between 24 November 2000, which indicated the dropped from rolls and present for duty dates.

2.  The record did not contain any other relevant information.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, VA Form 21-0781a (Statement in Support of Claim for Service Connection for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Secondary to Personal Assault/with applicant’s narrative (four pages), VA Form 21-0781a (Stressful Incident Number 2, two pages), applicant’s mother statement (three pages), and photocopies of a marriage license.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

The applicant did not provide any information with the application.
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.  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.  

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.  Army Regulation 635-200, 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.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of her characterization of service was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's 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 she believes she should have an honorable discharge because of the incidents that occurred prior to her going AWOL; she felt there was no other option at the time and felt she forced to go AWOL.  She had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that she ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.

5.  The applicant further contends she reached out for help from her chain of command and was ignored.  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 Services, Community Counseling Center, and other resources available to all Soldiers.  Likewise, she has provided no evidence that she should not be held responsible for her misconduct.

6.  Further, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with her overall service record.

7.  The applicant also contends she was forced to have sex numerous times; she now has nightmares, insomnia, stress and paranoia issues due to this event.  Although the applicant alleges that she was forced to have sex during her military service, there is no evidence in her military records and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence supporting this contention.  Therefore, this argument is not sufficient to support her request for an upgrade of her discharge.

8.  Moreover, the service record contains no evidence of nightmares, insomnia, stress or paranoia issues and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the 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.  

9.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

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

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and notwithstanding the examiner’s Discussion and Recommendation, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length of service and the circumstances surrounding her AWOL (i.e., the Board does not condone her AWOL, but gave credibility to her account of sexual assault as the preceptor of her misconduct and a prime mitigator), and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  The Board determined the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review        Date:  2 May 2014        Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify:  NA

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA

Board Vote:
Character Change:  4	No Change:  1
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		Yes
Change Characterization to:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
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)		AR20130014355



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1