Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/07/06	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "Dear To Whom It Concerns:I am writing you to request that I be able to finish my last 3 wks. of A.I.T.  I was making A's & had a 96% on my last test @ school.  Previously, I was improperly given an Article 15 for attempting to contact my son [redacted]. This article 15 was done improperly by Bravo Company 16th Ordnance Battalion Captain [redacted] and 1SG [redacted].  As a mother I have a right to communicate with my children.  I also have a court order from Orange County Florida signed by my former husband [redacted] in Maryland and/or Virginia, that gives me that right too.  A copy of this court order I sent to [redacted] of APG I.G. office.  Captain [redacted] (my military lawyer) explained to me when I got the article 15 that the order was unlawful, but, to go ahead & take the punishment.  The punishment turned out to be that I lost two ranks from E-4 to E-2, I lost $700 pay per month for two months and that I complete 45 days of extra duty.  Lt. Col. [redacted] also said I would get legal assistance for the problems with my ex-husband [redacted] and his no contact order for attempting to contact the child we share together, [redacted].  This legal assistance never happened because of time constraints.  I was up @ 0400, PT@0450, formation@0750, then foot march to school which started @0900, then school out @1600, then chow, formation & extra duty @1730 til 2000, M-F and extra duty on Saturdays & Sundays, after choir practice and church, from 0900 till 1800 or 2030.  I was not allowed to leave Bravo company area except for occasional trip to the Px.  Sometimes I was allowed to fly home, on pass for the weekend, to see my other two sons, but, that was it.  There was no time to mend problems w/ ex-husband, [redacted], stationed at the Pentagon, and his no contact order for attempting to contact our son [redacted].  After I was given the Article 15, I was taken out of school, then later put back in.  The day I went back to school, back in my old class (13J) I was jumped by three girls & beat up in class.  Private [redacted] (who was on the Army boxing team) being the initiator of the attack.  Private [redacted] was never punished for this.  I was then put in class 18J and doing well w/ 3 weeks left, when I was taken out by the company & told I was being chaptered out for my previous Article 15.  I wasn't allowed to go to school & I had to stay in the day room all day and wait for work orders.  There was very little to do...sometimes mow lawn, use weed wacker, laundry detail, chow detail, sweep inside & out, mop, clean latrines, vacuum, help sergeants w/ minor office work/computer work or battle buddy soldiers on errands.  Captain [redacted] wrote a nice letter of appeal for me to stay in the Army Reserve.  However, I was still chaptered out.  Please consider granting my request to finish my last three weeks of A.I.T. and graduate and go serve at my reserve unit in Orlando.  I feel all the problems stemmed from my ex-husband and the no contact order he had issued days after I arrived @ APG, Maryland, before I started school.  My ex-husband was always calling up the Commanders and 1SG's when I was in Basic Training@ Fort Jackson & this created problems for me that spiraled out from the start.  I had to do basic training twice.  Maybe, I could even finish my training @ my unit or if necessary a different MOS and a place where my ex-husband wouldn't know my location.  Thank you.  Sincerely, [redacted].  P.S.  Being separated from the Army for an article 15, (that was based on breaking an unlawful order) that I was already punished for, is improper.  It is punishing me twice for the same thing and that same thing being based on an unlawful no contact order."

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: 090427
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 090508   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: B Co, 16th Ord Bn, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 

Time Lost: None


Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 090311, Willfully disobeying a lawful command from a CPT (090207), disrespecting language toward a 1SG (090209), behaving with disrespect toward a CPT (090209), disrespecting language and deportment toward a 1SG (090209), and disobeying a lawful order from a 1SG (090209); reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $784 x 2 months, extra duty for 45 days, and restriction for 45 days (FG). 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  40
Current ENL Date: 080729    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  with an approved moral, administrative (080715), and medical waiver (080617)
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 09Mos, 10Days ?????
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 09Mos, 23Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USAR-080716-080728/NA
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: 112   EDU: College Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Orlando, FL 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 27 April 2009, 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-pattern of misconduct for harassing a LTC (090109), insubordination and failing to obey an order from a senior noncommissioned officer (090210), engaging in an altercation with another Soldier (090219), receiving a Field Grade Article 15 for disobeying lawful orders, and insubordination toward senior commissoned officers and senior noncommissioned officers (090311), and failing to obey orders from senior commissoned officers and senior noncommissioned officers (090403), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights. 
        
       The applicant consulted 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 1 May 2009, 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.  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 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 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.
       
       The analyst noted the applicant issue desiring to serve in her reserve unit.  However, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  If the applicant desires to reenlist, she should contact the local recruiter to determine her eligibility to reenlist.  Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes.
       
       In regards to the applicant's issue that she was separated from the Army for receiving an Article 15 for breaking an unlawful no contact order.  The analyst concluded that the applicant was separated for committing many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  
       
       Having examined all the circumstances, the analyst determined that the applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant’s service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends that the Board deny relief.
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 5 May 2010         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted a Settlement Agreement, dated (040903); and A dd Form 214, dated (090508).

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



































Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090011267
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 4 pages