Applicant Name: 

Application Receipt Date: 071012	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: The reason why i would like my discharge to be changed is because i completed 3yrs in Germany.  Also i was young at the time, i was stressed out because my husband went to iraq, and i had the baby all by myself with no help, and no guidance from my supervisor.  Also i didn't know how to handle any situation because i didn't have good leaders to help me out in my time of need.

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: 041101
Discharge Received:     Date: 041223   
Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: HHC, 1-214th Aviation Bn, APO AE 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040909, intent to deceive, alter an official document (040824), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $597 x 2 (suspended to be remitted if not vacated before 15 March 2005), 45 days extra duty (suspended, to be remitted if not vacated before 15 march 2005, Written Letter of Reprimand (FG).

040806, with intent to deceive, sign an official document, which was false (040627), reduction to E3, 14 days extra duty (CG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Year/Month:  81/11  
HOR City, State: Queens, NY
Current ENL Date: 030917    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 03Mos, 07Days ?????
Total Service:  03 Yrs, 05 Mos, 14 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 010710-030916/HD
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92A10/Auto Log Sp   GT: 89   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR, OSR, GWOTSM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 1 November 2004, 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 pattern of misconduct: on two known occassions you altered official documetns and falsified information on an official records  with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  The applicant 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 4 December 2004, 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 his 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 evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting herself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.  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: 12 September 2008              
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: 	       	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: ?????

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 12 September 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070014001
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages