Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/05/12	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "I received a field grade article 15 for charges that where misunderstandings and some of the charges aren't true.  I spoke to the chain of command several times and I was also denied of my right to the open door policy several times. The battilion commander LTC. Jessen told me I was being chaptered ,because he believes I was guilty of adultery and that statement was not true. I was discharged March 5, 2008 and my original ETS was suppose to be April 11, 2008. I have served in the Army National Guard prior to enlisting active duty and have served my country with honor and I deserve the honorable characterization."

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: Undated memorandum
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080305   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 122 CS Maint Co, Ft Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 071220, Fail to go to place of duty X 3 (070604, 070622 X 2), Disobey a Commissioned Officer (071102), Disobey a Non-Commissioned Officer (070606), Intent to deceive (071015), Reduction to E-2, $729 X 2 (suspended), 45 days extra duty, 45 days restriction (suspended) (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 050412    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 10 Mos, 24 Days ?????
Total Service:  		04 Yrs, 07 Mos, 06 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ARNG 030930-050411/HD
                                       IADT 040727-050121/UNC
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92A/Automated Logistic Spc   GT: 90   EDU: HS   Overseas: Korea (050501-060501)   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Jacksonville, FL
Post Service Accomplishments: None provided

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of a pattern of misconduct—several negative counseling statements for failure to be at appointed place of duty, failure to obey lawful orders and false official statement; a Field Grade Article 15 for failing to report to place of duty at the time prescribed, failure to obey a lawful orders of both an officer and a noncommissioned officer and for making a false official statement, 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 submitted 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 February 12, 2008, 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.  It states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor, and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service is so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.  Chapter 14 of this regulation 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 the entire applicant’s military records, and the issue submitted with the application, 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 the former soldier’s service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of 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.  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: March 6, 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 0    No change 5
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: No Change										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080008216
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages