Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/09/23	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states: "First of all, I would like to thank you for taking the time to consider my request for a discharge upgrade and for looking over what I have to say.  When I joined the Army as a Military Police Officer in 2006, I had just graduated High School, was recently married and was very young.  I had no idea what life was really about or how I was about to damage what should have been the best thing I could have ever done for myself and my family.  At that young age, I was unprepared and emotionally ill-equipped to handle the complications that arose in my personal life during my tour in Korea.  I allowed these complications to become obstacles in my life as a soldier and encumber any career advancement.  I closed that door for myself, but am asking for the chance to open another door now.  For the past 5 years,  I have been working diligently to turn my life around.  I have worked on Joint Base Lewis McChord in Washington as a Non Appropriated Funds employee for the past 2.5 years.  Working in an MWR facility I support soldiers, like my husband, on a daily basis.  I am asking for a discharge upgrade so that I will be able to obtain my GI Bill benefits and further my education and my career.  With a higher education, I hope to be able to continue to assist military service members and their families.  In the next few months, I plan to put myself through the County Police Academy and hope to join the County Police Force shortly after.  An Honorable discharge would greatly assist me in achieving this goal and allow me to redeem myself for past injunctions.  As a Police Officer, I will work very closely with the Military Police Officers on Joint Base Lewis McChord in upholding all Army standards.   I will only move forward from here and am grateful for any chance to do so.  The United States Army will continue  to benefit from my progress."

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: 070821
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070906   Chapter: 14-12b       AR: 635-200
Reason: Pattern of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 55th MP Co, Casey, AP 

Time Lost: AWOL x 1 for 22 days (070302-070323), mode of return unknown

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070406, AWOL (070302-070324), reduction to E1; forfeiture of $650.00 per month for two months (suspended); extra duty for 45 days; and restriction for 45 days; (FG).

070711, Underage drinking (070513), forfeiture of $650.00 per month for two 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:  18
Current ENL Date: 060221    Current ENL Term: 05 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 05  Mos, 24  Days ?????
Total Service:  		01 Yrs, 05  Mos, 24  Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31B10/Military Police   GT: 110   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states: "I have worked on Joint Base Lewis McChord in Washington as a Non Appropriated Funds employee for the past 2.5 years." 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 21 August 2007, 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 having received a Field Grade Article 15 (070711) for violating Art 92, failure to obey order or regulation and having received a Field Grade Article 15 (070406), for violating Art 86, AWOL, and for having received numerous counseling statements, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  
       
       On 22 August 2007, 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 Army 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 23 August 2007, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge 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 documents, and the issues 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.  
       
       The analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  
       
       Furthermore, the analyst noted that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issues about being able to use her GI Bill benefits and her desire to seek employment with the County Police Force.  However, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  
       
       Further, 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.
       
       In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the characterization of service and reason for discharge to include the reentry eligibility code 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: 23 March 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Online application.

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						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: 
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder





















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 AR20110019308
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages