Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2011/12/05 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that she requests an upgrade of her discharge to fully honorable. She contends her discharge is improper because the characterization of service was changed without her knowledge. She contends she performed her duties in a military manner, had a distinguished career of service and no disciplinary issues. 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: NIF Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 000826 Chapter: 2 AR: 600-43 Reason: Conscientious Objector RE: SPD: KCM Unit/Location: Schofield Barracks Military Police Company, 25th Military Police Bn, Schofield Barracks, HI 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: 18 Current ENL Date: 960912 Current ENL Term: 05 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 11 Mos, 15 Days ????? Total Service: 04 Yrs, 10 Mos, 19 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-951018-960911/HD Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 95B10 Military Police GT: 122 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Hawaii Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AGCM, ASR, OSR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 20 September 1999, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of AR 600-43, as a conscientious objector. In accordance with Chapter 2, AR 600-43, an investigating officer was appointed to determine whether the applicant met the requirements for discharge as a conscientious objector. On 24 November 1999, the applicant was notified of her pending conscientious objector hearing as mandated by regulation to present evidence in support of the applicant's claim and the applicant voluntarily waived her hearing. On 29 November 1999, the investigating officer sustained the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 600-43. On 15 March 2000, the court-martial convening authority recommended approval of the applicant's request and forwarded the request to the DA Conscientious Objector Review Board (DACORB) for approval. On 5 July 2000, the DACORB approved the applicant's request and directed the separation in accordance with AR 600-43, as a conscientious objector. Characterization of service was to be determined by the applicant's command. On 8 August 2000, the separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 600-43, sets the for policy, criteria, responsibilities, and procedures to classify and dispose of military personnel who claim conscientious objection to participation in war in any form or to the bearing of arms. An honorable or a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service may be given. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found several mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to fully honorable. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The analyst determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service; there is no derogatory information in the applicant's file (i.e., nonjudicial punishment, negative counseling statements, or administrative reprimands) warrants an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to fully honorable. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 30 May 2012 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: [redacted] Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated (111130); Memorandum, Characterization of Service, General, Under Honorable Conditions, dated (000808); DD Form 214, dated (000826); and a DD Form 257A, General Discharge Certificate, dated (000826). 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 applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to show that her characterization of service was inequitable. Army Regulations stipulate that the quality of service will be determined according to standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty. The applicant contends she was promoted to SPC/E-4 after disclosing her intent to apply for status as a conscietious objector (CO). However, the record shows she had already been promoted to SPC/E-4 on 1 October 1998 and she did not apply for CO status until September of 1999. In view of the foregoing, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. IX. Board Decision Board Vote: Character - Change 2 No change 3 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: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None XI. Certification Signature Approval Authority: Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army Secretary Recorder ????? Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20110024117 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 pages