Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/12/22	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he was unwilling to accept the Anthrax shot and was charged with disobeying a direct 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: 000602
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 000811   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: 597th Maintenance Company, 544th Maintenance Battalion, Fort Hood, TX 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 000324, failed to obey a lawful order issued by CPT, to take the Anthrax Vaccine on or about (000303); reduction to Private (E-1); forfeiture of $502.00 pay per month for two months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days; suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (000920) (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: Reenl/980108    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 7 Mos, 4 Days ?????
Total Service:  		4 Yrs, 9 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 951101-980107/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 63G10 Fuel & Elec Sys Repairer   GT: 111   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea (960428-970427)   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
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 2 June 2000, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense; in that he was counseled on taking the Anthrax Vaccine and was given a direct order on (000303) to take the Anthrax Vaccine; which he received a Field Grade Article 15 on (000324) for disobeying that direct order, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditions discharge and did not submit a statement in his 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 30 June 2000, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 
       
       The record contains a Military Police Report in reference to the applicant's offense of wrongful use of marijuana, in which he submitted a statement admitting to the offense dated 28 July 2000. 

       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, but a general discharge 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, and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his 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 his 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's issue that he was unwilling to accept the Anthrax shot and was charged with disobeying a direct order.  The applicant by refusing to comply with the mandatory Army Vaccine Immunization Program, the command would have determined as directed in AR 635-200, paragraph 13-2 that the seriousness of the offense was such, that the soldier’s retention would have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order, and morale, to include the applicant's availability for deployment as required by the Army.  
       
       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 September 2010         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 7 December 2007 and a copy of the Veterans Assistance Commission Form in reference to the applicant filing his DD Form 293 dated 7 December 2009.



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




























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 AR20100000477
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages