Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/12/08	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 149 submitted in lieu of DD Form 293 and supporting documentation 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: 	   Date: Undated
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080530   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: A Co, 3d Bn, 34th Inf Reg, 165th Inf Bde, Fort Jackson, SC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  33
Current ENL Date: 080318    Current ENL Term: 04 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 02 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 04 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA  020806-021004/UNC
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 108   EDU: College Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM (not annotated on the Applicant's DD Form 214)

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Dallas, TX
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the Applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 20 May 2008, the unit commander notified the Applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for  assualting another Soldier (080427), disrespecting a 1SG and being without a Battle Buddy (080425), departing the company without permission (080416), and disrespecting a drill sergeant (080410), with an uncharacterized 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 an uncharacterized discharge.  Subsequently, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the Applicant be discharged with an uncharacterized separation of service.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  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 Applicant’s military records, and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found that, contrary to the Applicant's contention, the Applicant received an uncharacterized 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.  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.  The evidence of record shows the Applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconduct, with an uncharacterized separation of service and a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "3."  A Soldier is in entry-level status (ELS) for the first 180 days of continuous active duty.  The purpose of the entry-level status is to provide the Soldier a probationary period.  Army Regulation 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldier’s service will be uncharacterized when her separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status.  Additionally, the record does not support the Applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the Applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the Applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.  Additionally, the analyst noted the Applicant's issue, however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Lastly, the Applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct", and the separation code is "JKA."  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.  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: 16 September 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 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: No Change
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080019808
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages