IN THE CASE OF: Ms. BOARD DATE: 11 March 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140006702 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. 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 an upgrade of her discharge from under other than honorable conditions to honorable or general, under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that she would like an upgrade of her discharge for the purpose of being able to rejoin the military. She contends, at the time of her discharge she was 18 or 19 years old, she had become depressed and lonely having to stay in an AIT barracks after having surgery. She believed at the time, leaving the company and base was her best option; now her negative discharge is stopping her from pursing a military career and a law enforcement career. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 14 April 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 28 May 2009 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, AR 635-200, Chapter 10, KFS, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: B Co, 84th Chem Bn, Fort Leonard Wood, MO f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 2 January 2008, 3 years and 22 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 10 months, 22 days h. Total Service: 10 months, 22 days i. Time Lost: 187 days j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-2 l. Military Occupational Specialty: None m. GT Score: NIF n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: None r. Administrative Separation Board: NA s. Performance Ratings: NA t. Counseling Statements: None u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 January 2008, for a period of 3 years and 22 weeks. She was 18 years old at the time of enlistment and a high school graduate. The record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which indicates on 16 April 2009, the applicant was charged with going AWOL (081008-090413). 2. On 16 April 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense. The applicant indicated she understood she could receive an UOTHC discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits. The applicant did submit a statement on her own behalf. The unit commander recommended approval of an UOTHC discharge. 3. On 18 May 2009, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of UOTHC. The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 4. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 28 May 2009, with a characterization of service of UOTHC under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of KFS and an RE code of 4. 5. The applicant’s record of service indicates 187 days of time lost for going AWOL from 8 October 2008 until her return on 13 April 2009. The DD Form 214 under review also indicates 42 days of excess leave (090417-090528). EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Three DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 9 October 2008, 7 November 2008, and 16 April 2009, changing the applicant's duty status from present for duty (PDY) to absent without leave (AWOL), AWOL to dropped from the rolls (DFR), and DFR to attached/PDY. 2. A report of return of absentee (DD Form 616) dated 14 April 2009, indicating the applicant surrendered 13 April 2009 after going AWOL on 8 October 2008. 3. There are no negative counseling statements or actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice in the record. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None was provided with the application. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for 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. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate. 2. Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. 3. Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. 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, the issues and document submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 2. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. It also shows that after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 3. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. Her record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority and it does not support an upgrade to an honorable or a general discharge at this late date. 4. The applicant contends, at the time of her discharge she was 18 or 19 years old and she had become depressed and lonely having to stay in an AIT barracks after having surgery. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. 5. Furthermore, 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. 6. The applicant expressed her desire to rejoin the Service and to better her opportunities for employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Also at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is not eligible to reenlist. 7. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 11 March 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 0 No Change: 5 Reason Change: 0 No Change: 5 (Board member names available upon request) Board Action Directed: Issue a new DD Form 214: No Change Characterization to: No Change Change Reason to: No Change Change Authority for Separation: NA Change RE Code to: NA Grade Restoration to: NA Other: NA 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) AR20140006702 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1