AR20140002673

IN THE CASE OF: Ms.

BOARD DATE: 7 January 2015

CASE NUMBER: AR20140002673
___________________________________________________________________________

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 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 APPLICANTS REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1. The applicant requests an upgrade of her discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2. The applicant states, in effect, that at the time of her discharge she was a young Soldier and that her misconduct was her first offense. Since her discharge she has taken college courses, completed volunteer services, and now she’s a positive and productive member of society.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 6 February 2014
b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 2 April 2013
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: HHC, 9th EN, Schweinfurt, GE
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 13 July 2010, 3 years and 27 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 8 months, 20 days
h. Total Service: 2 years, 8 months, 20 days
i. Time Lost: None
j. Previous Discharges: None
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 91H10, Track Vehicle Repairer
m. GT Score: NIF
n. Education: HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia, Germany
p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (110713-120224)
q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, NDSM, ACM-w/2CS, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL
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 13 July 2010, for a period of 3 years and 27 weeks. She was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. Her record indicates she served a period of combat in Afghanistan; earned several awards including the ARCOM, and achieved the rank of SPC/E-4. She was serving in Schweinfurt, GE, when separation action was initiated. She completed 2 years, 8 months, and 20 days of military service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1. The applicants service record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicants signature.

2. The DD Form 214 indicates on 2 April 2013, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKQ and a reentry (RE) code 3.

3. On 25 March 2013, DA, Installation Management Command-Europe, Schweinfurt Transition Center, APO AE, Orders Number 084-0004, discharged the applicant from the Army effective 2 April 2013.

4. The applicants available record does not show any recorded actions under the UCMJ or unauthorized absences or time lost. However, the applicant achieved the rank of SPC/E-4 and at the time of discharge her DD Form 214 indicates she was reduced to the rank of PVT/E-1. The actions that caused her reduction in rank are not contained in the service record.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD:

Discharge Orders 084-0004, dated 25 March 2013.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, a letter from the Richland County Veterans Affairs Officer, dated 3 February 2014, letters from the Schweinfurt High School (two), a self-authored letter referencing consideration for granting a honorable discharge, letter of employment verification, and a copy of her DD Form 214 for the period of service under review.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

The applicant states, in effect, that since her discharge she’s been attending college, completed volunteer services, and now she’s a positive and productive member of society.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. 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.

2. Army Regulation 635-200, 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 members 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. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

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 Soldiers separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

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

2. The applicants record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the Army. However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process.

3. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c by reason of misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails 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 that at the time of her discharge she was a young Soldier, her misconduct was her first offense since her discharge, she has been attending college, completed volunteer services, and now she’s a positive and productive member of society were carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon whether her contentions have merit because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. 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 her contention. The applicants statements alone does 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.

5. Furthermore, 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.

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 Boards 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 the analyst recommends the Board deny relief.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 7 January 2015 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) AR20140002673

Page 5 of 5 pages

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

1