1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 1 December 2015 b. Date Received: 24 December 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her bad conduct discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to include the reentry eligibility (RE) code. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, there were several errors in dates which made information appear to be a pattern. She had proof before the court proceedings that she did not do what they accused her of doing. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 June 2016, and by a 4-1 vote, after carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and hearing her testimony, the Board determined that clemency is warranted based on the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service to include her combat service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e., her personal testimony). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief by upgrading the applicant’s characterization of service to under other than honorable conditions. A change in the reason for discharge is not authorized under Federal statute. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: Court-Martial Other / AR 635-200, Chapter 3 / JJD / RE-4 / Bad-Conduct Discharge b. Date of Discharge: 24 June 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NA (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was found guilty by a Special Court-Martial of the following offenses; without authority, failing to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty x2 (9 April 2012 and 3 December 2012); willfully disobeying a lawful command from COL L.G.R., her superior commissioned officer, then known by her to be her superior commissioned officer (3 June 2013); willfully disobeying lawful orders from SFC R., a noncommissioned officer, then known by her to be a noncommissioned officer (25 March 2013); and being disrespectful in deportment toward SSG D.A.T., a noncommissioned officer, then known by her to be a noncommissioned officer, who was in the execution of his office (1 June 2012). On 25 September 2013, she was sentenced to a bad conduct discharge and reduction to PVT/E-1. On 3 January 2014, the sentence was approved. The record of trial was forwarded to The US Army Court of Criminal Appeals for review. The US Army Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence and the order that the sentence to be executed is not contained in the available record and government regularity in the judicial process is presumed. (3) Recommended Characterization: NA (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 January 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 24 June 2015 / Bad-Conduct Discharge 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 7 January 2011 / Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 34 years /three years of college / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: SSG / E-6 / 68E10, Dental Specialist / 18 years and 28 days / block 12e on the applicant’s DD Form 214 total prior inactive service, is incorrect and should read 2 years, 1 month and 12 days to account for Navy Reserve Service. d. Prior Service/Characterizations: USN (27 May 1997-26 May 2001) / HD USNR (27 May 2001-8 July 2003) / NA RA (9 July 2003-30 October 2008) / HD RA (31 October 2008-6 January 2011) / HD e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: Germany / Mali / Korea / SWA / Iraq (27 May 2007-28 May 2008) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-5, AGCM-3, NDSM, AFEM-2, ICM-W/CS, GWOTEM, KDSM-2, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-4, MUC-2, USNGCM, USNSSDR-2, USCGUC g. Performance Ratings: 16 January 2011-15 January 2012, Fully Capable 16 January 2012-10 October 2013, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: The applicant received a negative counseling statement, dated 7 April 2011, for failing to use the chain of command. FG Article 15, dated 21 April 2011, for, wrongfully soliciting SPC G.D., to make to SFC S., a false official statement to wit: " same day as my PT Test," or words to that effect, by ordering SPC G.D. to do so (30 March 2011); she was derelict in the performance of her duties in that she willfully failed to measure SPC G.D., three times and in the Army Physical Training Uniform, while administering a Tape Test, as it was your duty to do (24 March 2011); and wrongfully communicating to SPC J.M., a threat by saying, "You could find yourself off post and get yourself hurt," or words to that effect (23 March 2011); reduction to SGT / E-5. Special Court-Martial Order adjudged on 3 January 2014, which indicates the applicant was found guilty of several offenses; see paragraph 3c(2). i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application (six pages). Additional documents submitted 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided by the applicant. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 3, Section IV establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the ADRB to be established facts, issues relating to the applicant’s innocence of charges for which she was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the ADRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of her bad conduct discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to include the reentry eligibility (RE) code. The applicant’s record of service and the issues submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The service record indicates the applicant was adjudged guilty by a court-martial and the sentence was approved by the convening authority. Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process. The Board is empowered to change the discharge only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed. The applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for separation to include the reentry eligibility (RE) code. A change in the narrative reason for discharge to include the RE code is not authorized under Federal statute. The applicant seeks relief contending, there were several errors in dates which made the information appear to be a pattern; she had proof before the court proceedings that she did not do what they accused her of doing. 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 contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that she was unjustly discharged. 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. The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with her overall service record. 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 document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional documents: ABCMR request, enlisted clinic phone roster, Rhode Dental Clinic alert roster, three certificates of training, DLAB results memorandum, language proficiency questionnaire, record firing scorecard, ACES record, PT scorecard, four Enlisted Record Briefs, certificate of promotion, e-mail traffic, two promotion orders, DA photo, DA Form 31 (Request and Authority for Leave), audio recordings from Korea (no actual recordings), and Order of the Spur citation. b. The applicant presented the following additional contentions: Change RE-Code c. Witness: Yes 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: Per the Board’s Presiding Officer, based on the facts and evidence, the Board determined the applicant self-referred to behavioral health for three visits in September 2013, resolved. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 June 2016, and by a 4-1 vote, after carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and hearing her testimony, the Board determined that clemency is warranted based on the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service to include her combat service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e., her personal testimony). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief by upgrading the applicant’s characterization of service to under other than honorable conditions. A change in the reason for discharge is not authorized under Federal statute. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Under Other Than Honorable c. Change Reason to: NA d. Change SPD/RE Code to: 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 NA - Not applicable 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 OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police – PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status MST – Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150019271 5