Application Receipt Date: 070302

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change

Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293 and supporting documents.

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:    Date: 060830
Discharge Received:     Date: 061013
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, Special Activities,
Fort Belvoir, VA  22060

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060425/Stealing money from another
Soldier X 2, in the amounts of $400.00 and $200.00 on or about
(060210)/(Field Grade)

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  790515
Current ENL Date: 040322/OAD    Current ENL Term: 2 Years  The applicant's
period of service on active duty was extended on (050314) for 1 year, and
11 months, and on (060207) for 1 year, 1 month, and 2 days, giving her an
End Date of (070310).
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 06Mos, 22Days (Item 12c "Net Active Service
This Period" of the applicant's DD Form 214 incorrectly reads as 2 years, 7
months, and 3 days, should read 2 years, 6 months, and 22 days).
Total Service:  06 Yrs, 00Mos, 19Days      
Previous Discharges: USAR-000925-040321/Concurrent Service
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No
MOS: 92G10 (Food Service Operation)   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas:
None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCAM, NDSM, ASR, AFRM (w/M Device), AAM, Certificate
of Achievement
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: Woodbridge, VA
Current Address: 4660 Martin Luther King Ave (Apt B602)
Washington DC 20032
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 30 August 2006, the unit commander
notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the
provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of
misconduct (receiving a Field Grade Article 15 for stealing money from a
fellow Soldier in the amount of $600.00 on or about 10 February 2006, and
committing larceny in the city of Alexandria, Virginia by obtaining
approximately $11,000 by false pretenses from GEICO), with a under other
than honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  The
applicant's election of rights regarding her consultation with legal
counsel, the chain of command's recommendation for separation from the
service, and the separation approving authority directing the applicant's
discharge, are not part of the available record.  Furthermore, it appears
that the applicant was entilted to a administrative separation board, by
virtue of her being recommended for a under other than honorable conditions
discharge, however the administrative separation board proceeding's are not
part of the available record, and the analyst presumed Government
Regularity in the discharge process.  On 13 October 2006, DA, US Army
Garrison, Fort Belvoir, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5920, orders 286-0002,
discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective
date:  13 October 2006.


      The applicant has a Progress Report dated (060213), in her Official
Military Personnel File.





      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 available military
records, documents, 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.  Furthermore, if the applicant desires
to reenlist, she should contact the local recruiter to determine her
eligibility to reenlist.  Those individuals 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.  Therefore, the analyst
determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of
service remains both proper and equitable.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing:                  Date: 1 October 2007
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA

Exhibits Submitted: NA



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 0    No change 5   - Character
                                   Change 0    No change 5   - Reason
                                   (Board member names available upon
request)

IX.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the
period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s
recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was
both proper and equitable, and voted to deny relief.





















Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, Examiner

X.  Board Action Directed
No Change
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority:

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official:


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON            DATE: 12 October 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder