Application Receipt Date: 061116 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the Applicant II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: NIF Date: NA Discharge Received: GD Date: 050329 Chapter: 14-12b AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: RE-3 SPD: JKA Unit/Location: Headquarters, USA Training Center and Fort Jackson, Fort Jackson SC Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF, correspondence between applicant's chain of command speaks about pending Article 15, and the applicant indicated she received a company grade Article 15, but there is no record in the file. Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier's Overall Record DOB: 810606 Current ENL Date: 040912 Current ENL Term: 4 Years Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 02Mos, 01Days Total Service: 01 Yrs, 02Mos, 01ays Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: NIF EDU: 15 years Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The applicant's complete facts and circumstances that led to the applicant's separation from the army are not part of the available records; however the record contain a properly constituted DD form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). Her DD Form 214 indicates that she was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12b by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JKA (i.e., pattern of misconduct), this document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumes government regulatory in the discharge process. The evidence of record further shows that the correspondence between the applicant's chain of command recommends the applicant for an administrative discharge but does not specify the type of characterization of the discharge. On 24 March 2005, the intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge proposal and recommended approval of the Chapter 14 discharge. On 24 March 2005, the separation authority directed that the applicant's case be processed through administrative procedures as opposed to processing her case through medical disabilities channels. The evidence of record shows that on 28 March 2005, Orders 087-1200, DA, HQ, US Army Training Center and Fort Jackson, Fort Jackson SC, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date: 29 March 2005. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's military records, and the issue she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of her service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. By her misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 4 December 2007 Location: Wash DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: YES VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change No change - Character Change No change - Reason (Board member names available upon request) IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation Case report reviewed and verified by: Gloria Blake, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: Other: RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060016056 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 4 pages