RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        26 September 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050016205


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Beverly A. Young              |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Marla Troup                   |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Chester Damian                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Edward Montgomery             |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that the Record of Proceedings under Article 15,
Uniform Code of Military Justice be set aside, that her rank of sergeant
(SGT),
E-5 be restored, and her disability severance pay be paid at her last rank
successfully held which was SGT, E-5.

2.  The applicant states she received her DD Form 199 (Physical Evaluation
Board (PEB) Proceedings) and her clearance papers and she was told she was
going to be given an Article 15.  This Article 15 was returned in September
by a Judge Advocate General (JAG) officer because it was said to be unjust.
 She states the Article 15 was submitted again by her Rear Detachment
Command when her unit left for Iraq.  She states the command lied about the
reasons for the Article 15.  She cleared the post, but her orders were
changed and she was told she could not get out until the Article 15
proceedings were completed.  She was informed that if she wanted to appeal,
she would be retained in the military until August 2006 which was her
original expiration term of service.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty); a Certificate To Return To Work Or
School; her Medical Appointment Reminder Cards; an Adult Placement Form;
her Honorable Discharge Certificate; a Sworn Statement; three Developmental
Counseling Forms; an incomplete Record of Proceedings under Article 15
dated 8 September 2005; her discharge orders and amendment of discharge
orders; a Field Grade Article 15 Punishment Worksheet; a DA Form 2627
(Record of Proceedings under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice
(UCMJ)) dated 28 September 2005; and a DA Form 199 (Physical Evaluation
Board (PEB)) Proceedings.

4.  The applicant also provides a letter from her daughter, dated 27 June
2006.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 May 1992.
She completed basic training and advanced individual training and was
awarded military occupational specialty 77F (Petroleum Supply Specialist).
She continued to serve on active duty through a series of reenlistments.

2.  The applicant was promoted to SGT, E-5 on 1 February 2002.

3.  The applicant submitted two Appointment Reminder Cards which show she
had appointments at Blanchfield Army Community Hospital on 18 August 2005
from 0900 hours to 1100 hours and on 19 August 2005 at 1500 hours.
4.  On 19 August 2005, the applicant was counseled for failure to report.
The counselor indicated she had neglected to show up for formation on 18
August 2005 at 0630 hours.  The counselor stated the applicant had been
informed previously of this formation and still chose not to show up.

5.  On 19 August 2005, the applicant was counseled for failure to report
back to duty.  The counselor indicated the applicant did not return to duty
on 19 August 2005 or call anyone to say what was happening after her
appointment.

6.  The applicant submitted a Certificate to Return to Work or School which
indicates she was under a physician’s care from 19 August 2005 to 20 August
2005 and was able to return to work/school on 20 August 2005.

7.  On 22 August 2005, the applicant received a Developmental Counseling
Form for disobeying a direct order from a senior noncommissioned officer
and for conduct unbecoming of a noncommissioned officer.

8.  A PEB evaluated the applicant on 29 August 2005 and determined that she
was unfit for service and recommended a combined rating of 10 percent.  It
was recommended she be separated with severance pay.  The applicant was
diagnosed as having chronic pain in the left wrist and right knee without
limitation of motion, not requiring daily narcotics.

9.  The applicant provided a Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ
dated 8 September 2005.  These proceedings are not complete.

10.  Headquarters, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) and Fort Campbell
Orders 264-0726 dated 21 September 2005 discharged the applicant from
active duty on 28 September 2005 in the rank of SGT.  The additional
instructions indicate she was authorized disability severance pay in pay
grade E-5 based on 13 years, 4 months and 21 days of service.

11.  Headquarters, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) and Fort Campbell
Orders 266-0703 dated 23 September 2005 amended Orders 264-0726 dated
23 September 2005 to show her discharge date as 7 October 2005 and to show
she was authorized disability severance pay in pay grade E-5 based on 13
years and 5 months of service.

12.  On 28 September 2005, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment
under Article 15 for failing to go to her appointed place of duty on 18
August 2005; for leaving her appointed place of duty on 19 August 2005; and
for being disrespectful in deportment toward her superior noncommissioned
officer.
13.  The applicant elected not to demand trial by court-martial, requested
a closed hearing in the Article 15 proceedings, and elected to present
matters in person.  After consideration of all matters presented in the
closed hearing, the imposing commander decided that, beyond a reasonable
doubt, the applicant had committed the offenses.  He imposed the punishment
of reduction to specialist (SPC), E-4.  The imposing commander directed
that the original DA Form 2627 be filed in the restricted portion of the
applicant's OMPF.  The applicant elected not to appeal the punishment.

14.  The applicant was discharged from active duty on 7 October 2005.  She
completed 13 years and 5 months active military service.

15.  Item 4a (Grade, Rate or Rank) on her DD Form 214 shows her rank as
“SPC.”

16.  Item 4b (Pay Grade) on her DD Form 214 shows her pay grade as “E04.”

17.  Information obtained from the Defense Finance and Accounting Service
revealed the applicant was being paid disability severance pay in the rank
of SPC, E-4.

18.  Army Regulation 27-10 (Military Justice), in pertinent part, provides
the applicable policies for administration of nonjudicial punishment.  The
regulation states that nonjudicial punishment may be imposed to correct,
educate, and reform offenders whom the imposing commander determines cannot
benefit from less stringent measures; to preserve a Soldier’s record of
service from unnecessary stigma by record of court-martial conviction; or
to further military efficiency by disposing of minor offenses in a manner
requiring less time and personnel than trial by court-martial.  All Article
15 actions, including notification, acknowledgment, imposition, filing
determinations, appeal, action on appeal,
or any other action taken prior to action being taken on an appeal, except
summarized proceedings are recorded on DA Form 2627.

19.  Army Regulation 635-5 prescribes the separation documents prepared for
Soldiers upon retirement, discharge or release from active military
service.  It establishes standardized policy for the preparation and
distribution of DD Form 214.  The DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the
Soldier’s most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a
brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from
active duty, retirement or discharge.

20.  On 31 July 2006, a “mock” Army Grade Determination Review Board
recommended, in a 2 – 1 decision, that, if the applicant were still on
active duty, she should be separated as a SGT, E-5.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant received nonjudicial punishment imposed under Article 15
on 28 September 2005 for failing to go to her appointed place of duty; for
leaving
her appointed place of duty; and for being disrespectful in deportment
toward her superior noncommissioned officer.  The imposing commander
determined that the applicant should be reduced from SGT, E-5 to SPC, E-4
on 28 September 2005.

2.  The applicant’s statements have been carefully reviewed; she stated a
JAG officer had returned the Article 15 because it was unjust, but she
provided no supporting statements from that officer.  She has not provided
any compelling evidence to support her request to set aside the Article 15.

3.  However, the applicant was entitled to be separated from active duty by
reason of physical disability in the grade equivalent to the highest grade
or rank in which she served satisfactorily and she should have been
afforded the opportunity to have her records reviewed by the Army Grade
Determination Review Board to determine that grade.  She was not afforded
that opportunity.

4.  On 31 July 2006, a “mock” Army Grade Determination Review Board
recommended that, if the applicant were still on active duty, she should be
released from active duty as a SGT, E-5.  The Board agrees with this
recommendation and concludes that the applicant should have been separated
from active duty effective 7 October 2005 in the grade of rank of SGT, E-5.

BOARD VOTE:

___MP__  __CD___  ___EM __  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  Notwithstanding the staff DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS above, the
majority of the Board determined during their review that the evidence
presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a
result, the Board

recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual
concerned be corrected by:

      a.  setting aside the Article 15 administered under the UCMJ on or
about
8 September 2005; and

      b.  showing that she was discharged in the rank and grade  of SGT, E-
5 on 7 October 2005.

2.  That the Defense Finance and Accounting Service pay to the applicant
all pay and allowances due as a result of the correction in paragraph 1,
above.






                                  ______________________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR                                      |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |YYYYMMDD                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)          |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]