Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/07/12	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that she served 3 years, 3 months and 26 days of a 4 year enlistment. It has been found that she suffers from a personality disorder and we believe that to be the cause of behaviors. Denying this request, limits her ability to attend college. We request that the board look at her servcie as honorable so she may use her GI Bill benefits. This will allow her to find and maintain meaningful and gainful employment. She is now 50% service connected for other conditions that occurred in service. 

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: 090604
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 090708   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 240th Quartermaster Company, 391st Combat Sustainment Support Battalion, (Rear) (Provisional), Germany, APO, AE 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 090303, disobeyed a lawful order from SGT's, noncommissioned officers x 3 on (071116), (080903), (081007), disrespectful in language toward SGT, a noncommissioned officer on (081007), disobeyed a lawful order from SGT, a noncommissioned officer on (081007), disrespectful in deportment toward SGT, a noncommissioned officer on (081007), reduction to Private (E-1), forfeiture of $699.00 pay per month for 2 months, extra duty 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:  19
Current ENL Date: Reenl/080226    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	1 Yrs, 4 Mos, 13 Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 10 Mos, 2 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 050907-080225/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92W10 Water Treatment Spec   GT: 84   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany (060313-090708)   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, 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 the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of a pattern of misconduct; in that she did on (090429) on separate occasions was disrespectful toward a CPL and a SGT; on (090415) on separate occasions she was disrespectful toward a SGT and a SSG; on (090414) on separate occasions she was disrespectful toward a SSG and failed to go to her appointed place of duty; on (090413) she was disrespectful toward a SFC and a SSG ; on (081007) she failed to obey several orders and on separate occasions she was disrespectful toward a SGT; on (080903) she failed to obey an order; and on (071116) she failed to obey an order. 
       
       The unit commander recommended separation 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 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 of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 26 June 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 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 all the applicant’s military records, and the issue and documents 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 her 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 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's issue that it has been found that she suffers from a personality disorder and believes that to be the cause of her behavior.  Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition like a personality disorder solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct. 
       
       Further, the applicant was given a mental status evaluation by competent medical authority at the time of her separation and was cleared of any psychiatric condition, which would prevent her from participating in any legal or administrative action.  She was mentally responsible for her behavior, and was able to distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate in any administrative or judicial proceedings. 
       
       
        The applicant further contends that denying this request, limits her ability to attend college.  Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.
       
       Additionally, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined 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: 30 March 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: ?????

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 28 June 2010, DD Form 214 for the period of service ending 8 July 2009, and a copy of the Department of Veterans Affairs rating decision in reference to the applicnt's claim she filed dated 21 May 2010.

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 AR20100018704
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages