Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/03/31	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The Applicant states in effect:  "In 1998, the Anthrax vaccination was declared mandatory with overseas personnel being among the first to receive the vaccination.  I was stationed in Camp Hovey, Korea and we were to be one of the first to receive the vaccination.  After conducting my own personal research I made the decision to not receive the vaccination.  I first refused the vaccination on the record in the fall of 2008, and my chain of command took action to discharge me from the Army.  After realizing that other soldiers (women in particular) were asking me for information on the safety of the vaccination my chain of command decided to conduct a UCMJ in order to make an example out of me and to intimidate others in to taking the vaccination.  Up until this point I had been a role model soldier.  I was up for my reenlistment at the time of the refusal and had originally planned on reenlisting.  The military was going to be my life, the US Army my chosen career.  I was taking classes at the time so I could reenlist with a different MOS.  That is how sure I was of my career with the US Army.  After my research of the vaccination, everything changed for me and I made a determination on my refusal without ever a waiver in my decision.  
The anthrax vaccination was a series of 6 shots over a period of 18 months.  With less than a year left in my enlistment at the time of refusal, I asked my command repeatedly to allow me to finish out my enlistment without taking the vaccination since I would not be able to complete the series by the end of my original enlistment.  Letters were written on my behalf by my immediate superiors yet the Battalion Commander decided against their recommendations of (1) finishing out my enlistment, (2) discharging me with an honorable discharge.  Since my discharge it is now stated that a member of the US Armed Services who is within 180 days of extinction of their enlistment shall not start the series since they are unable to complete the series.  In several documents it is recorded that the series should only be administered if it can be done so in the intervals set forth and in the time allowed. A decision was not made on my discharge until 6 months away from the end of my enlistment.  I do not think it was just for me not to receive an honorable discharge and to not be allowed to finish out my enlistment.  I also do not think it just that my reason for seperation is listed as unsatisfactory performance when my performance in the US Army was never an issue.  I made a personal decision to not take this vaccination.  I did not and still do not think this vaccination and others like it should be forced on military personnel.  I would like to request a change in my discharge to Honorable and I also request the unsatisfactory performance be removed as my reason for discharge.  Please consider and accept the documents I am sending in to support my reasoning."  The Applicant provided 12 supporting documents for the Board's consideration.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 981228
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 990120   Chapter: 13    AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance	   RE:     SPD: JHJ   Unit/Location: HHD/A Co, 2d FSB, 2ID, Camp Casey, Korea 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None in the official file (OMPF), however, she was discharged for having received a FG Article 15 for disobeying a lawful order from an NCO.  She would've been reduced to the grade of E-1, as shown on DD Form 214.


Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 960724    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 05Mos, 27Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 05Mos, 27Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 54B10/Chemical Ops Spc   GT: 102   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR.  The applicant states she received an AAM, however, it is not contained in the OMPF and she did not provide any documentation to support it.

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Knightdale, NC
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 28 December 1998, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance for having received a Field Grade Article 15 (981020) for disobeying a lawful order from an NCO to medically submit to the anthrax vaccination, with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  On 28 December 1998, 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 document that would show that the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general under honorable conditions discharge is not contained in the available record and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.  Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, however, a fully honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, the issue and the documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incident of unsatisfactory performance.  The analyst determined that 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 refusal to comply with the mandatory Army Vaccine Immunization Program, the command would have determined as directed in AR 635-200, paragraph 13-2 that the seriousness of the offense was such, that the soldier’s retention would have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order, and morale.  By her unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service.  Furthermore,  the analyst noted the applicant's issue, however, the narrative reason for separation is governed by specific directives.  The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, paragraph 13-2, AR 635-200.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unsatisfactory Performance", and the separation code is "JHJ."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined 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: 6 February 2009         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

VIII.  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 characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of her service as evidenced by the many certificates of achievement and her chain of command supporting letters, and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 4    No change 1
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080004834
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages