Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 20080007518	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant.

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: 	NIF   Date: 070904
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 071005   Chapter: 14       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: HHD, BCTP, Fort Leavenworth, KS 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070710, disobeyed a lawful order from a 1SG (070620) and disobeyed a lawful order from a SGT (070620), reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $403 (suspended), extra duty for 14 days, extra duty in excess of 7 days (suspended), 14 days restriction, restriction in excess of 3 days (suspended), and an oral reprimand (CG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  23
Current ENL Date: 070309    Current ENL Term: 2 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 06Mos, 27Days ?????
Total Service:  		04 Yrs, 05Mos, 26Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-030410-070308/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 42A10 Human Resources Spec   GT: 97   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii/Southwest Asia   Combat: Afghanistan (040410-050301)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Alexandria, VA
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       Evidence of record shows that on 4 September 2007, 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 for displaying a continuous pattern of misconduct, she was arrested for driving under the influence (DUI) (060430); received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for DUI (060615); received a Company Grade Article 15 for willfully disobeying a senior NCO and a NCO (070710).  She was advised of her rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of her case by an administrative separation board contingent upon her receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than honorable, 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 senior intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 1 October 2007, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  
       
       The applicant's record contains a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated 15 June 2006, for driving under the influence of alcohol (Administrative).
       
       The applicant's record contains a Military Police Report dated 8 June 2006. 

       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 during the period of enlistment under review, the  issues and document 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 the applicant's issue; however, found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  In view of the foregoing, 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: 25 February 2009         Location: Washington, DC

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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  




        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 2    No change 3
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: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080007518
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages