IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 27 June 2014
CASE NUMBER: AR20140003156
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.
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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to fully honorable.
2. The applicant states, in effect, she served with much pride and the many counseling statements she received were for minor infractions. She believes she was discriminated against because of her race and sexual orientation.
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:
a. Application Receipt Date: 18 February 2014
b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 26 June 2013
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct, (Serious Offense), AR 635-200
Chapter 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: HHC, 25th Combat Aviation Brigade, Wheeler
Army Airfield, HI
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 16 November 2012/4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service: 7 months, 11 days
h. Total Service: 3 years, 2 months, 28 days
i. Time Lost: None
j. Previous Discharges: DEP, 100326-100713, NA
RA, 100714-121115, HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 27D10, Paralegal Specialist
m. GT Score: 113
n. Education: HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service: SWA
p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (120101-120925)
q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, NATO
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 14 July 2010, for a period of 4 years. She was 20 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. She reenlisted in the Army on 16 November 2012, for a period of 4 years. She served in Afghanistan and did not earn any significant awards or decorations. She completed 3 years, 2 months, 28 days of active duty service. When her discharge proceedings were initiated, she was serving at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii.
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 that on 26 June 2013, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, 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 of 3.
3. The applicants available record does not show any recorded actions under the UCMJ, unauthorized absences or time lost.
4. On 10 June 2013, DA USA Garrison-Hawaii, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, Orders Number 161-0011, discharged the applicant from the Army effective 26 June 2013.
EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT’S RECORD:
1. A memorandum, dated 17 May 2013, reflects the separation authority directed the applicant be discharged from the military prior to the expiration of current term of service, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.
2. Discharge Orders Number 161-0011, DA USA Garrison-Hawaii, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, effective 26 June 2013.
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:
The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 24 January 2014, a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review, and a undated, self-authored statement.
The applicant did not provide any post-service activity in support of her application.
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 record of service, her military records, the issue 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, 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 also 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 the discharge was unjust because of her race and sexual orientation. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discriminated. The applicants statements alone do not overcome the governments presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge.
5. 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.
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 recommend the Board deny relief.
SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:
Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 27 June 2014 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify, No
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: No Change
Change RE Code to: No Change
Grade Restoration to: NA
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) AR20140003156
Page 5 of 5 pages
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)
CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE