Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/29	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: 	   Date: 071016
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 071101   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: Distribution Co, 25th BSB, Fort Wainwright, AK 

Time Lost: The applicant was confined for 30 days as a result of the Summary Court-Martial sentence.  However, this period is not annotated on the DD Form 214 block 29, dates of time lost during this period.

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

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070914, SCM, failure to report x 2 (070827), and (070814), assaulted a SGT (070906), disrespectful in language and deportment towards a SGT (070906), and underage drinking x 2 (070824), and (070814); reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $867, and confinement for 30 days.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  20
Current ENL Date: 070111    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 09Mos, 21Days ?????
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 09Mos, 21Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92A10 Automated Logistics Spec   GT: 90   EDU: GED Cert   Overseas: Alaska   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Aurora, CO
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 10 October 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense for abuse of illegal drugs, failure to report x 2, assault and disrespect of a NCO, and underage drinking x 2, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  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 general, under honorable conditions, 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 and senior intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The separation authority's documentation approving the conditional waiver request, waiving further rehabilitative efforts and directing that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions, is not part of the available record and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  On 30 October 2007, DA, Military Personnel Division, Fort Wainwright, AK, Orders 303-0203, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date:  1 November 2007. 

       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 documents 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 acknowledges the independent document (Department of Veteran Affairs) submitted with the application indicating that the applicant was diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which was determined to be service connected and was granted a 70% disability rating.  Further, the analyst noted the applicant's issue requesting that her narrative reason be changed to medical instead of misconduct; however, the evidence of record shows that the applicant was appropriately discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense for abuse of illegal drugs, failure to report x 2, assault and disrespect of a NCO, and underage drinking x 2, which constituted various incidents of misconduct.  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: 10 August 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: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090008702
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages