IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	21 May 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130015941
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the examiner’s 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 discharge from under other than honorable conditions to honorable or general, under honorable conditions.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she would like an upgrade of her discharge so she can receive heath care from the VA for her now diagnosed Type II Diabetes.  She contends her discharge was the result of having to care for her dying mother who has now passed away.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		29 August 2013
b. Discharge Received:		Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			7 January 2010
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:			U Co, 262d QM Bn, Fort Lee, VA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	14 August 2008, 4 years and 24 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	6 months, 27 days
h. Total Service:			6 months, 27 days
i. Time Lost:				301 days 
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	92F, Petroleum Supply Specialist
m. GT Score:				102
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM
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 Regular Army on 14 August 2008, for a period of 4 years and     24 weeks.  She was 27 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  Her record documents no acts of valor or significant achievements.



SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which indicates that on      7 December 2009, the applicant was charged with going AWOL (090127-091124).

2.  On 7 December 2009, 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 UOTHC 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 own behalf.  The unit commander recommended approval of an UOTHC discharge.  

3.  On 16 December 2009, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of UOTHC.  The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 

4.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 7 January 2010, with a characterization of service of UOTHC under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of KFS and an RE code of 4. 

5.  The applicant’s record of service indicates 301 days of time lost for being AWOL from         27 January 2009 until she was apprehended on 24 November 2009.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Three 4187s (Personnel Actions), dated between 27 January 2009 and 7 December 2009, changing the applicant's duty status.

2.  There are no negative counseling or actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice in the record.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided with the 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.

ANALYST’S 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, the issue and document 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 her discharge was the result of having to care for her dying mother.  However, there is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that her discharge was the result of having to care for mother.

5.  Furthermore, 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.  

6.  The applicant also requested upgrade of her discharge for the purpose of being able to receive healthcare from the VA.  However, the service record contains no evidence of Type II Diabetes diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Further, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining healthcare opportunities from the VA.
7.  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:  Record Review       Date:  21 May 2014        Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  No 

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)		AR20130015941



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1