1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 30 September 2013 b. Date Received: 6 June 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of uncharacterized discharge to honorable, and to change the narrative reason for discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, the request is based on two factors: the discharge was due to not being MOS qualified within 24 months, when in fact, was a prior service with an MOS in Dental. The applicant attempted to reschedule the school dates within the same year, but was informed that it could not be done. Currently, the applicant desires to serve with the South Carolina Army National Guard. However, is unable to do so, since current regulations state that waivers cannot be accepted for Reentry 3 and unsatisfactory performance, although the applicant received a waiver and a recommendation letter from the unit commander, completed the two part physical in September 2013, and the warrior transition course successfully during the first year of enlistment in 2007. The reduction in rank was also unjust. Evidence will show the applicant made contact with the unit within the required time period. The applicant was not aware of any problem until the following drill. When the applicant received a counseling, the applicant refused to sign it because of numerous inaccurate statements, and it escalated to an imposition of an Article 15. The applicant never missed a drill since enlistment in 2007. The applicant was always on time and never caused a problem in the Army National Guard. The actions taken were based on an attempt to have the MOS training dates rescheduled, because the applicant tried to obtain answers from the chain of command as to why training could not be rescheduled. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 February 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Unsatisfactory Performance / Implementation Policy NGR 600-200, dated 1 October 2009, Paragraph 8-35f / NA / RE-3 / Uncharacterized b. Date of Discharge: 21 July 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF; however, State Military Department, Office of the Adjutant General memorandum, dated 5 June 2013, indicates her discharge was due to failing to attend MOS reclassification course within 24 months of her enlistment. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / Uncharacterized 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 19 January 2007 / 1 year and extended to a total of three years (Records show this enlistment was extended an additional year on 16 January 2008, and on 4 January 2009, for an additional year, and ETS of 18 January 2010). b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 33 / Bachelor of Arts / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / None / 6 years, 7 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAF (7 January 1999 to 6 January 2003) / HD USAFR (7 January 2003 to 23 November 2006) / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; AFTR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Four counseling statements: dated 5 April 2008, for being in debt (amount of $14,762), and that she cannot attend an MOS school until the debts were resolved and not receiving her bonus due to security clearance issues; dated 15 May 2009, for being required to be duty MOS qualified and school requirements; dated 14 June 2009, for being unexcused from drill; and dated 12 July 2009, for failing to complete military occupational specialty (MOS) school within 24 months of enlistment into the South Carolina Army National Guard, with an enlistment date on 19 January 2007. Email, dated 17 June 2009, documents communications between the applicant's commander and the applicant regarding her absence from the June drill attendance. Record of Proceedings Under 2-1-2520 (NJP), South Carolina Code of Military Justice (SCCMJ) Jurisdiction, 15, dated 11 July 2009, for absenting herself from her unit without authority on 13 June 2009, and remained absent on 14 June 2009, in violation of Article 19, Section 25-1-2925, SCCMJ. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3, and a fine of $100. Two separate Cancellations of Classes with report dates of 24 July 2009, and 7 August 2009, because the applicant stated "her work will not give her [the] time off." State Military Department, Office of the Adjutant General memorandum, dated 5 June 2013, reflects that the applicant's request to change the character of service and reentry code on her NGB Form 22, was denied, and that her discharge was due to failing to attend MOS reclassification course within 24 months of her enlistment. (Applicant's documentary evidence) i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF / NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 30 September 2013; State Military Department, Office of the Adjutant General memorandum, dated 5 June 2013; NGB Form 22 with discharge orders; DD Form 214 (6 January 2003) with DD Form 215; reduction in grade Orders, dated 20 July 2009; Article 15, dated 11 July 2009; memorandum, dated 30 January 2009 (one-year extension); DA Form 4836 (Oath of Extension of Enlistment or Reenlistment), dated 16 January 2008 (one-year extension); DA Form 4836 (Oath of Extension of Enlistment or Reenlistment), dated 4 January 2009 (one-year extension); Personnel Data; Warrior Transition Course certificate; Personnel Action (Update STPA Data), dated 26 February 2008; two enlisted promotion point worksheets; three Personnel Data; memorandum, dated 28 January 2008 (Intent to Deny Security Clearance); Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions, dated (28 January 2008); counseling statement, dated 5 April 2008; email, dated 18 June 2009; counseling statement, dated 14 June 2009; Sprint - Call details; /// counseling statement, dated 2 December 2007, 15 May 2009 (Duty MOS Qualification School Requirements), 12 July 2009 (Failure to complete MOS school within 24 months of enlistment); three email, dated 22 April 2009, 11 May 2009, and 12 June 2009; SOR Receipt and Statement of Intention, dated 9 April 2008; Cancellation of Course (Report Date: 2009-07-24); and Cancellation of Course (Report Date: 2009-08-07). 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation (AR) 135-178 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel of the Army National Guard. Chapter 6 of NGR 600-200 sets the policies, standards, and procedures for the separation of enlisted Soldiers from the ARNG/ARNGUS. The character of service for administrative separation is based on a determination reflecting a Soldier's military behavior and performance of duty during a specific period of service. At separation, characterization of service are authorized: Honorable, General (Under Honorable Conditions), and Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. The service of Soldiers in entry level status is normally described as uncharacterized. Separation with an uncharacterized description of service applies when separated in an entry-level status; or fraudulent entry, erroneous enlistment, reenlistment, void enlistment; or by being dropped from the rolls of the Army. Further, any of the types of characterization or description of service listed may be used in appropriate circumstances unless a limitation is set forth in section III of this chapter. Characterization of service as a result of administrative action is governed by this regulation and the service of Soldiers is either characterized or uncharacterized when they are separated from the ARNG. Army Regulation 135-178 provides the criteria for governing uncharacterized separations and the issuance of honorable, general (under honorable conditions), or under other than honorable conditions discharges. The regulation further authorizes separation with an uncharacterized description of service when separated in an entry level status. National Guard Regulation 600-200, paragraph 6-6, provides guidance that the separation of a Soldier from the ARNG is a function of state military authorities in accordance with state laws and regulation. However, due to the dual status of the Soldier as a Reserve of the Army, use characterization of and limitations on service descriptions contained in AR 135-178, chapter 2, section III, in determining the type of separation and character of service to be issued. Paragraph 6-10 states that for an entry level status, service will be described as uncharacterized if separation processing is initiated while a Soldier is in an entry level status. Referring to Special Abbreviations and Terms, entry level status is described as upon enlistment, a Soldier qualifies for entry level status during-(1) The first 180 days of continuous active military service; or (2) The first 180 days of continuous active service after a service break of more than 92 days of active service. Further, a member of a Reserve component who is not on active duty or who is serving under a call or order to active duty for 180 days or less begins entry level status upon enlistment in a Reserve component. Entry level status for such a member of a Reserve component terminates as follows: (1) 180 days after beginning training if the Soldier is ordered to ADT for one continuous period of 180 days or more; or (2) 90 days after the beginning of the second period of ADT if the Soldier is ordered to ADT under a program that splits the training into two or more separate periods of active duty. For the purposes of characterization of service, the Soldier's status is determined by the date of notification as to the initiation of separation proceedings. Paragraph 6-35f (formerly paragraph 8-35f), in pertinent part, states that initiation of discharge proceedings is required for Soldiers without medical limitations who have two consecutive failures of the APFT, prior service applicants who refuse to attend MOS reclassification course within 24 months or who are eliminated for cause from Noncommissioned Officer Education System (NCOES) courses, unless the responsible commander has imposed a bar to reenlistment: RE 3. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of her uncharacterized discharge to honorable, and to change the narrative reason for her discharge. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature. The NGB Form 22 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of NGR 600-200 (1 October 2006), Chapter 8, paragraph 8-35f, by reason of Unsatisfactory Performance, with an uncharacterized service. The applicant's available record and documentary evidence confirms that on 12 July 2009, the commander of the applicant's unit counseled the applicant of failing to complete the military occupational specialty (MOS) school within 24 months of her enlistment of 19 January 2007, into the South Carolina Army National Guard, and that she was granted waivers to complete the MOS qualification course in 2008 and 2009. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met when it was determined that the applicant's failure to complete her required MOS qualification training within 24 months of her enlistment. The applicant's numerous contentions of being unjustly discharged because her discharge was based on not being MOS qualified within 24 months, although she was a prior service with an MOS in Dental, and that when she attempted to reschedule her school dates within the same year, she was informed that it could not be done, were carefully considered. However, the applicant bears the burden of demonstrating with substantial and credible evidence that an error or injustice has occurred relative to her discharge characterization. The applicant has not produced sufficient evidence to support the contentions that she may have been unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements alone are insufficient to upgrade her discharge or to change the narrative reason for her discharge. Furthermore, the available record confirms the applicant was in an entry level status (ELS) at the time of her discharge. The purpose of the entry-level status is to provide the Soldier a probationary period. Army Regulation 135-178 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldier's service will be uncharacterized when separation is initiated while in entry level status. A general (under honorable conditions) discharge is not authorized under ELS conditions and an honorable discharge may be granted only in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty. The applicant's available service record contains no such unusual circumstances and her service did not warrant an honorable discharge. In the current circumstances, the applicant was not able to complete MOS qualification training requirements within 24 months of her enlistment of 19 January 2007, because of unresolved employment conflict; wherein, her employer was unable to provide her time off during her scheduled MOS training course. Records further show she was unable to attend the course the previous year due to unresolved debts and security clearance. As expounded in the letter for The Adjutant General, dated 5 June 2013, it appropriately identify and addressed the issue in this case. The letter also confirms that the applicant was separated from the service in July 2009, at a point in the applicant's period of service she had yet to complete the MOS reclassification course requirements within 24 months of her enlistment. An uncharacterized discharge is neither positive nor negative and it is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service. It merely means that the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for the character of service to be rated as honorable, or otherwise. The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on NGR 600-200, Table 6-1, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. The applicant contends her reduction in rank was unjust. The Army Discharge Review Board is not empowered to restore former Service member's grade, rate or rank. The Board may only change the characterization or reason for discharge. If an applicant believes there is an error or injustice in the reduction of her rank, she may make an application to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records, using DD Form 149, which can be obtained online or from a Veterans Service Organization. The applicant contends the discharge was unjust because she made contact with the unit within the required time period, she was not aware of any problem until the following drill, and when she received a counseling, she refused to sign it because of numerous inaccurate statements, and the actions taken were based on her attempt to have her MOS training dates rescheduled. However, 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 her issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence to support the contention that she was unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further sufficient evidence has been provided with the request to change the characterization of her discharge and the reason for her discharge. The applicant requests to change the narrative reason for her discharge. However, NGR 600- 200, paragraph 6-35 (formerly 8-35) provides the reasons and reentry eligibility codes for separation of Soldiers from the State ARNG. Paragraph 35f refers to unsatisfactory performance due to refusing to attend MOS reclassification course within 24 months and the reentry code as RE-3. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. Based on the available 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 February 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change Authenticating Official: 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 AR20170014165 1