Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2012/08/03 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: 2006/11/08 I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that at the time of her discharge, the brigade and immediate chain-of command was going through major internal changes. The brigade commander at the time stated that this issue would be handled in house; however, it did not happen because he was removed from command and the interim brigade commander decided that she was not Army material. The brigade command sergeant major and the battalion commander both agreed to keep the issue in house, meaning an Article 15, but the interim brigade commander insisted on an immediate discharge. His decision was upheld by the division commander and she was subsequently discharged and demoted. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 990601 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Howard University 1R, Fort Myer, VA Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 46 Current ENL Date: 971203 Current ENL Term: 04 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05 Mos, 29 Days ????? Total Service: 10 Yrs, 10 Mos, 18 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR (871003-871102) / NA ADT (871103-880122) / NA USAR (880123-881003) / NA RA (881004-950103) / HD RA (950104-971202) / HD Highest Grade: E-6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 71L (Administrative Spec) GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Alaska, Haiti Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2; JSAM -2; AAM-3; AGCM-3; NDSM; AFEM; HSM; NPDR-2; ASR; OSR; JMUA V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states, in effect, that she has been employed with a health insurance organization for 13 years; received her BS in healthcare administration in June 2008, and is currently in the process of obtaining a life and health license. She has also received recognitions for her involvement with numerous volunteer activities on her own time. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS (i.e., for the good of the Service-in lieu of trial by court-martial) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3." On 24 May 1999, Orders 144-0268, DA, HQ, 18th Personnel Services Battalion, Fort Bragg, NC 28307-5000, discharged the applicant from the regular Army, effective date: 1 June 1999. b. Legal Basis for Separation: 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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The only pertinent evidence available for review regarding the applicant's discharge is the DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, which was authenticated by the applicant. The DD Form 214 shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. In connection with such a discharge, the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. Procedurally, the applicant was required to consult with defense counsel and to voluntarily, and in writing, request separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated or lesser included offenses under the UCMJ. In the absence of information to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. It also noted the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant would have been aware of it prior to requesting discharge. The applicant contends that since leaving the Army, she has been employed continuously since June 1999 with the same company for over 13 years; received her BS degree; and received recognitions for her involvement in many volunteer activities. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character. However, in review of the misconduct for a serious offense, the analyst determined that her numerous accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 11 March 2013 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: [redacted] Witnesses/Observers: Friend, LTC (Retired) S Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated 26 July 2012 with self-authored statement; DD Form 214 for service under current review; BS Certificate, dated 31 May 2008; 4 letters of support; 3 character reference letters; 2 letters of appreciation; letter of recognition and appreciation; United Way platinum award; American Legion Statement, dated 4 March 2013; additional 3 letters of support. VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of her service, and the circumstances surrounding her misconduct and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails restoration of grade to E-6/SSG. IX. Board Decision Board Vote: Character - Change 5 No change 0 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) X. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: SSG/E-6. XI. Certification Signature Approval Authority: ARCHIE L. DAVIS III Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board JOSEPH M. BYERS Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army Secretary Recorder ????? 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 UOTH - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20120013842 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 4 pages