Applicant Name: ?????

Application Receipt Date: 070815	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: "I feel the reason that my discharged should be change is because I still had a lot of growing up to do when I first joined the Army.  I would love nothing more than the opportunity to enlist once more and prove myself again.  I can honestly say that, yes I made a lot a mistakes, but none of my infractions were of a serious nature.  I can also say that I was never penelized for my work performance.  Even though it was never documented I often received praise for my willingness to work hard and eagerness to learn new things.  I believe that with an upgraded DD214 and another chance to serve my country as a soldier I would progress greatly.  I have been out of the Army since 2004, since then I have managed to work toward my degree in criminal justice and maintain a job working with disadvanttaged children.  I have not been in any legal troubles and with age I have matured drastically from a troubled stubborn 18 year old.  I have a greater respect for authority as well as a better understanding of following simplle orders and commands.  I would greatly appreciate one last chance to prove myself to myself, my family and most importantly my country.  Thank you"

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: NIF
Discharge Received:     Date: 040127   
Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: 21st MP Co, 503rd MP Bn, 16th MP Bde, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 021018, Making a false official statement to a senior NCO; Reduction to E-2, suspended, 14 days restriction and extra duty (CG).

030127, Vacation of 021018 suspension for failure to obey a lawful order on 15 January 2003.

030325, Failure to act as sentinel on the milvans by failing to maintain visual contact at all times with the milvans (030224), willfully disobeyed a lawful order from a Commissioned Officer x 2 (030224), disrespect to a Commissioned Officer (020324), willfully disobeyed a lawful order from an Noncommissioned Officer (030313); Reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $575 pay per month for two months, suspended, 45 days extra duty (FG).

031007, Negligently failed to fire her weapon below the red line at the range (030903), wrongfully wore an unauthorized body piercing (030808), failure to be at appointed place of duty x 3 (030728, 030803, 030814); reduction to E-1, 14 days restriction and extra duty (CG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Year/Month:  83/08  
HOR City, State: Hillside, NJ
Current ENL Date: 011012    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 03 Mos, 16 Days ?????
Total Service:  02 Yrs, 03 Mos, 16 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31B  Military Police   GT: 98   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states she has worked "toward my degree in criminal justice and maintain a job working with disadvantaged children."  No documentation provided.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 12 December 2003, the unit commander notified the Applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for misconduct, having received a Field Grade Article 15, one vacation of a suspended punishment and two Company Grade Article 15s for numerous offenses such as showing complete disregard for military customs and courtesy, making a false official statement, dereliction of duty, failure to report on numerous occasions, disrespected Commissioned and Noncommissioned Officers, and showing disregard for Army regulations, with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  The Applicant was advised of her rights, consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  On 31 December 2003, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the Applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions.

      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, however, a general 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.  Furthermore, the analyst noted that the Applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the Applicant was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.  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: 			Date: 10 September 2008              
Location: Washington, D.C.

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: 	       	Proper	 	Improper	
						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.  

								        
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: 10 September 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070011292
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 6 pages