IN THE CASE OF: Ms. BOARD DATE: 19 February 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20130013214 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the analyst’s Discussion and Recommendation that follows, the Board determined the discharge is now inequitable. The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, and the circumstances surrounding her discharge mitigated the discrediting entry in her service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority. This action entails a restoration of grade/rank to E-5/SGT and a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to 1. 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 to upgrade the characterization of her service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable, and to change the narrative reason for her discharge. 2. The applicant states, in effect, her discharge was improperly conducted because she was not aware of being discharged from a unit she never knew she was assigned to and she received no formal or informal counseling. She was deployed overseas in March 2011 in Afghanistan during deactivation of her prior unit 806th Med Company (Army Reserve) in Augusta, Georgia, the last unit she participated in with notice of a future deactivation in November 2010 and instruction on finding a replacement unit or be placed in IRR. She thought that after the unit deactivation she would be placed in IRR as it was stated after inquiring of several units for available positions. She further states in her self-authored statement, in pertinent part and in effect, that she is a mother, a wife of a veteran and proudly served over 13 years, eight years of active duty and an additional five years with the Army Reserve in good standing. In December 2010, she accepted a civilian position to provide support in Afghanistan. She returned in February 2013 and remained in the states because of her spouse’s medical condition. She had planned to continue her service in the reserve. However, upon inquiring about her status in the IRR, she found out she was discharged for unsatisfactory participation with a UOTH discharge in August 2012, from the unit she had previously contacted but never had a confirmation of acceptance. She was devastated with the discharge and having her rank taken from her as she was a Soldier, who had no negative or any adverse action against her. She does not feel the discharge was appropriate or deserved. She requests her discharge action be revoked or amended and her previous rank reinstated. She would like to continue her service to her country. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 16 July 2013 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 1 August 2012 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: AR 135-178 e. Unit of assignment: 7224th USA Med Spt Unit, North Charleston, SC f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 18 May 2006, NIF (USAR) g. Current Enlistment Service: 6 years, 2 months, 14 days h. Total Service: 14 years, 5 months, 29 days i. Time Lost: NIF j. Previous Discharges: RA (950816-980316)/HD RA (980317-000628)/HD RA (000629-031130)/HD USAR (060518-090218)/NA ADT (090219-090810)/HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 27D10, Paralegal Specialist m. GT Score: 115 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Korea p. Combat Service: NIF q. Decorations/Awards: AAM-4; AGCM-2; NDSM-2; ASR; OSR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 18 May 2006 (however, that enlistment contract is NIF). She was 31 years old at the time of her enlistment with the USAR and a high school graduate. Her previous service includes serving on active duty (three enlistments) from 16 May 1995 through 30 November 2003. The record she provided reflects she served two tours in Korea. She earned three AAM awards, and has completed 14 years, 5 months, and 29 days of active duty and reserve service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The available evidence shows the applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the USAR. 2. The record indicates that on 27 July 2012, Department of the Army, Headquarters, 81st Regional Support Command, Fort Jackson, SC, Orders 12-209-00021, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective 1 August 2012, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On the same orders, she was reduced to E-1, effective 27 July 2012. 3. The applicant’s available record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Discharge orders, dated 27 July 2012. 2. Promotion orders, dated 24 March 2011, which promoted her to E-5, effective 1 April 2011. 3. TPU reassignment orders, dated 24 March 2011, indicate the applicant’s reassignment is based on acceptance of promotion into the unit, effective 1 May 2011. 4. DA Form 1059, dated 20 July 2008, indicates she achieved the course standards for the Warrior Leadership Course. 5. DA Form 1059, dated 3 April 2007, indicates she achieved course standards for the Dental Specialist Course. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided with her self-authored statement, her discharge order for the service under current review; human resources letter, dated 17 December 2010, with offer of employment, dated 27 December 2010; Afghanistan Project Work Disclosure, dated 17 December 2010; Personnel Qualification Record, dated 6 February 2009 with DA Form 2-1; DD Form 214, dated 10 August 2009; and DD Form 214, dated 30 November 2003. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant provided none. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1. Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the U.S. Army while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted Soldiers for a variety of reasons. The separation policies throughout the different Chapters in this regulation promote the readiness of the Army by providing an orderly means to judge the suitability of persons to serve on the basis of their conduct and their ability to meet required standards of duty performance and discipline. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, and convictions by civil authorities. 2. The characterization is based upon the quality of the Soldier’s service, including the reason for separation and determined in accordance with standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty as found in the UCMJ, Army Regulations, and the time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. The reasons for separation, including the specific circumstances that form the basis for the discharge are considered on the issue of characterization. 3. Possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general, under honorable conditions, under other than honorable conditions, or uncharacterized if the Soldier is in entry-level status. However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge 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. The available record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the Army Reserve. 2. The applicant’s available record contains a properly constituted order which was authenticated by the appropriate military authority. This document identifies the characterization of the discharge and the presumption of government regularity prevails in the discharge process. 3. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 4. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that her service mitigated the type of discharge she received from the USAR. 5. The applicant contends her discharge was improperly conducted because she was not aware of her discharge from a unit she never knew she was accepted into. She adds she was deployed overseas in March 2011 during her previous unit’s deactivation and thought she would be placed in the IRR. She claims she was offered an opportunity to serve as a civilian in Afghanistan in December 2010, and she was deployed in March 2011 and returned in February 2013. However, she did not provide an official certified documents or evidence that reflects her deployment/service in Afghanistan. Her contentions were carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. 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 sufficient evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains insufficient documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. 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, certified documents reflecting the period of her service in Afghanistan) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record. 7. Therefore, based on the available evidence, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 19 February 2014 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 5 No Change: 0 Reason Change: 5 No Change: 0 (Board member names available upon request) Board Action Directed: Issue a new DD Form 214: No Issue a new Discharge Order: Yes Change Characterization to: Honorable Change Reason to: ‘Secretarial Authority’ Change Authority for Separation: AR 135-178, Chapter 14 Change RE Code to: 1 Grade Restoration to: SGT/E-5 Other: TO: ARBA Promulgation Team. Arlington, VA Date: 19 February 2014 The Army Discharge Review Board, under the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553, in the case of the applicant named in page 1, directs the ARBA Promulgation Team, Arlington, VA to issue a new discharge order to the applicant which reflects the following directed changes: ( X ) Change characterization of discharge to Honorable. ( X ) Restoration of grade to E-5/SGT. 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) AR20130013214 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1