Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/02 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached document 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: 060222
Discharge Received: Date: 060615 Chapter: 4-2b AR: 600-8-24
Reason: Unacceptable Conduct RE: SPD: JNC Unit/Location: B Co, FSC, 115th FSB, Fort Hood, TX
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050801, Wrongfully maintaining a personal relationship with a noncommissioned officer between (041001 and 050501); wrongfully having sexual intercourse with an noncommissioned officer between (041001 and 050501); disobeying a lawful command from her superior commissioned officer between (041001 and 050501); making a false statement x 2 (050503 and 050503), forfeiture of $1171.00 pay per month for one month and a written reprimand, (GO).
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 23
Current ENL Date: 040110/OAD Current ENL Term: 03 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 05Mos, 06Days ?????
Total Service: 02 Yrs, 10Mos, 02Days ?????
Previous Discharges: USAR-030814-040109/NA
Highest Grade: O1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 88A/Transportation, Gen GT: NA EDU: BA Degree Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (040723-050316)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, ICM, GWOTSM
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 22 February 2006, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2, AR 600-8-24, by reason of misconduct, moral or professional dereliction.
The applicant was directed to show cause for retention on active duty after acts of personal misconduct and derogatory information. She was advised that she could submit a voluntary resignation in lieu of elimination or submit a rebuttal and request an appearance before a Board of Inquiry. The applicant's resignation in lieu of elimination memorandum and the applicant's chain of commands recommendations are not contained in the available record and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.
On 22 February 2006, Commander, HQ, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX, recommended the applicant be eliminated with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.
On 10 May 2006, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
The applicant's record contain's a General Officer's letter of reprimand for maintaining an adulterous relationship with a married noncommissioned officer between (041001 and 050501).
b. Legal Basis for Separation:
Army Regulation 600-8-24 sets forth the basic authority for Officer Transfers and Discharges. Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security.
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:
After a careful review of all the applicants military records during the term of service under review, the issues, and the documents submitted, the analyst determined that the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. The applicants 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 Army Officers. By her misconduct at the time of discharge, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant provided no significant corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicants service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.
The analyst acknowledges the applicant's in-service accomplishments outlined with the application. However, in review of the applicants entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.
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: 17 March 2010 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 applicants record during the term of service under review and considering the analysts 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: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
Case Number AR20090006189
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090005366
On 8 October 2008, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board, and directed that the applicant be discharged from the U.S. Army with a characterization of service of fully honorable. The evidence of record shows that the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Chapter 4, Paragraph 4-2a, AR 600-8-24, by reason of substandard performance, with a characterization of service of fully...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110012081
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states: "I was discharged from the US Army for Unacceptable Conduct secondary to my romantic involvement with a Non-Commissioned Officer. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's military records during the term of service under review, the issue and document submitted with the application, the analyst determined that the evidence was not sufficiently...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011242
Application Receipt Date: 2008/07/16 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. The Ad Hoc Review Board met; and on 6 May 2008, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards), approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board, and directed that the applicant be discharged from the U.S. Army with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The evidence of record shows that the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015482
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 20 January 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductpattern of misconduct (disrespected a noncommissioned officer X 3, on or about (040416, 050128, 050503); disrespected and disobeyed a noncommissioned officer on or about (050128); left her place of duty, and disobeyed a noncommissioned officer on or about (051011)), with...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014825
Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. The appropriate authority approved the applicant's request and issuance of an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 20 December 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008900
Current ENL Service: 04 Yrs, 04Mos, 20Days ????? On 3 March 2006, the applicant voluntarily tendered her resignation from the service under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 600-8-24, resignation in lieu of further elimination proceedings. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 31 May 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD -...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080002108
Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? On 7 May 2007, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The applicants 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090005616
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's military records for the term of service under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit a change to the applicant's narrative reason for discharge. The evidence of record shows that the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2b(5) and (8), AR 600-8-24, by reason of...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090006383
Applicant Name: ????? Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Based on this evidence the Board found that the applicants misconduct was mitigated by the circumstances surrounding her discharge, that being, the applicant had requested a hardship discharge due to a family situation.
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060012236
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 22 May 2005, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 600-8-24, by reason of substandard performance of duty. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the term of service under review and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the narrative reason for...