Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/11/04	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   N/A

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 080313
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080606   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 204th  MP Co, 519th MP Bn, Fort Polk LA 

Time Lost: AWOL (070829 - 070830) 2 days, mode of return unknown

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080221, failure to report (17 Jan 08); reduced to E2, suspended, to be remitted if not vacated on or before 18 Aug 08, extra duty and restriction for 14 days. (CG)

080522 suspension vacated, at or near Fort Polk, LA, on or about 7 May 08, without authority, failed to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty, to wit: 0600 accountability and 0900 work call.

071003, at or near Fort Polk, LA, on or about 30 Aug 07, without authority, absent yourself  from your unit, to wit:  204th MP Co, and did remain so until on or about 30 Aug 07; on or about 17 Jan 08 and 10 Apr 07, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty, to wit: 0615 formation (080117) and 1500 accountability formation (070410); on or about 11 Jul 07, disobeyed an order from a noncommissioned officer to report to the training room after sick call; reduction to E3, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 1 Jan 08, forfeiture of $403.00 suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 1 Jan 08, extra duty and restriction for 14 days.(CG)

071128 suspension vacated, at or near Fort Polk, LA, on or about 14 Nov 08, without authority, failed to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty, to wit: 1300 work call.

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 070716    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 10Mos, 20Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 8Mos, 28Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 040907-070715/HD (Immediate Reenlistment)
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92A Automated Logistical   GT: 96   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (051214-061214)
Decorations/Awards: AAM(2), MUC, NDSM, GWOTSM, HSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None provided by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 13 March 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 pattern of misconduct  for failing to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place x 3 (070410, 070711, and 080117), absenting herself from her unit 070830 and did remain so until 070830, and disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer by not reporting to the training room after sick call on 070711, 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 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 commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 29 May 2008, the separation authority after having reviewed both the administrative separation packet and the medical evaluation board proceedings, determined that the Soldier's medical condition was not a direct or substantial contributing cause of the conduct that lead to the recommendation for administrative elimination.  Additionally the separation authority determined there were no other circumstances in this case that would warrant disability processing instead of further processing of the administrative separation and 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 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.  Furthermore, 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.  Further, 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.  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:  13 January 2010         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: None

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
								         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: N/A
Other: N/A										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: ?????
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090019432
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages