1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 19 August 2015 b. Date Received: 3 September 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the charges against her were based on information that was hearsay. She provided evidence that proved all funds were accounted for in Charge # 1. The investigator could show where the funds were truly missing and all the evidence was based on hearsay from an individual who talked other parents into supporting her complaint after she told them the applicant was embezzling funds. Due to the fatal car accident of her husband and the injuries to her and her daughters, she was not clearly in the right frame of mind to fight for herself. When the second alleged charge of Overseas Housing Allowance (OHA)/Basic Housing Allowance (BHA) fraud of the government was filed she just gave up, because of everything that was going on. She had no one to support her and felt overwhelmed. All of the funds were paid back for the overpayment in OHA/BHA, which was an error on her and her husband for not being aware that the full allotted entitlement was not due to happen. Instead of allowing the correction to be made, the CID investigator told the commander that this was a pattern of bad conduct. The applicant’s lawyer informed her the first charge would not stand up in a court-martial based on the fact that the funds were accounted for with supporting documents and financial books. The applicant’s lawyer also advised her that OHA/BHA cases have been an issue and he could not advise her to take it to court because if she lost, her children would lose her as well. She could not take the chance after her children had just lost their father. She has included a detailed letter that explains the events that occurred. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Warner Robins, GA on 15 November 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is now inequitable. The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include her combat service, the circumstances surrounding her discharge (i.e. arbitrary action by the command), her post service (i.e. currently working in the Corps of Engineer), and her personal testimony mitigated the discrediting entry in her service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable, a change to the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), AR 635-200, chapter 14-12a, and change SPD Code to FND. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 600-8-24 / Chapter 3-13 / DFS / NA / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 7 April 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 3 October 2012, reflects the applicant was charged with violations of the UCMJ, Articles 80, 86, 121, and 132 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Charge I: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 80, Attempts Charge II: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, AWOL Charge III: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 121, Larceny and wrongful appropriation (with seven specifications) Charge IV: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 132, Conduct unbecoming of an officer (with three specifications) (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 26 October 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: 13 March 2013 (Army AD Hoc Review Board) (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 18 March 2013 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Appointment: 20 April 2006 / Voluntary indefinite b. Age at Appointment/Education/GT Score: 40 / Master’s Degree / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: CW3 / 920B0, Supply Systems Technician / 16 years, 11 months, 9 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: RA, 24 September 1992 to 1 March 2001 / HD AGR, 3 August 2005 to 1 September 2005 /HD USAR, 2 September 2005 to 19 April 2006 / NA e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: Bosnia, Germany, Korea, SWA / Iraq (25 May 2007 to 4 August 2008) f. Awards and Decorations: BSM, MSM, AAM-3, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR-4, MOVSM, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: 17 June 2006 thru 1 March 2007, Do Not Promote 2 March 2007 thru 31 July 2009, Best Qualified 1 August 2009 thru 30 July 2011, Best Qualified 31 July 2012 thru 6 April 2013, Fully Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: CID Report, dated 5 September 2012, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for fraud, conspiracy, and larceny of Government funds. Developmental Counseling notifying the applicant of being flagged for an ongoing investigation. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application with all listed supporting documents. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 635-100 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of commissioned and warrant officers from the active Army. Chapter 3, Section XV establishes policy and procedures for involuntary relief from active duty. Paragraph 3-58(g) provides that an officer who is found guilty, or action is taken tantamount to a finding of guilty, in a Federal or State court may be immediately released from active duty by the Secretary of the Army, when the offense is punishable under the UCMJ with confinement of 1 year or more, or when the offense involves moral turpitude, regardless of the sentence received or the maximum punishment under any code. AR 600-8-24 prescribes the policies and procedures governing the transfer and discharge of Army officers. Chapter 3, paragraph 3-13 outlines the rules for processing requests for resignation for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by a general court-martial. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table identifies the appropriate reentry code to assign the Soldier based on the narrative reason for discharge. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is an administrative separation from the service under conditions other than honorable. An officer will normally receive an under other than honorable conditions when they resign for the good of the service, are dropped from the rolls of the Army, are involuntarily separated due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or for the final revocation of a security clearance as a result of an act or acts of misconduct. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant’s record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The record indicates the applicant was charged with the commission of offenses punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge. The applicant voluntarily requested resignation in lieu of trial by general court-martial. The applicant desires a change in the narrative reason for the discharge. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 3, paragraph 3-13, AR 600-8-24 with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial," and the separation code is "DFS." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends that she was suffering from the loss of her husband after being involved in a vehicle accident with her family and simply did not have the will to fight the charges against her. However, 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. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted no additional documents or contentions b. Witness(es)/Observer(s): None 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Warner Robins, GA on 15 November 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is now inequitable. The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include her combat service, the circumstances surrounding her discharge (i.e. arbitrary action by the command), her post service (i.e. currently working in the Corps of Engineer), and her personal testimony mitigated the discrediting entry in her service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable, a change to the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), AR 635-200, chapter 14-12a, and change SPD Code to FND. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214/: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infraction) AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a d. Change SPD/RE Code to: FND / NA e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: NA AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO – Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH – Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS – Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status MST – Military Sexual Trauma PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA – Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150014317 5