Application Receipt Date: 060223 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293. The applicant states in essence that she needs an upgrade to maintain her employment as a veterans service officer, and that she has been a productive citizen since her discharge. No additional documents were submitted with the application. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 930107 Discharge Received: Date: 930128 Chapter: 14-12b AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct-Pattern of Misconduct RE: SPD: JKM Unit/Location: 42nd Field Hospital, 194th Armored Brigade (Separate), Fort Knox, Kentucky 40121 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 630923 Current ENL Date: REENL/900316 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 9 Mos, 13 Days ????? Total Service: 5 Yrs, 10 Mos, 11 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA - 870318-900315/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 91B10, Medical Specialist GT: 95 EDU: 14 Years Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM w/ 1st OLC, NDSM, NCOPDR, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Submitted. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 20 January 1993, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconduct (numerous counseling statemetns for lateness and failure to repair), 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. On 20 January 1993, the intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 20 January 1993, 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, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is 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 during the period of enlistment under review and the independent evidence she submitted, the analyst noted that the unit commander used “Board Procedures” when notifying the applicant that he was initiating action to separate her under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct. By using “Board Procedures” the authority for approval of the applicant’s separation rested with the General Court-Martial Convening Authority. The evidence of record shows that someone other than the General Court-Martial Convening Authority approved the applicant’s discharge. In view of the foregoing, the discharge was improper. Accordingly, full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority is recommended to the Board. This action does not entail a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code; however, the Board can consider it. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 20 December 2006 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: N/A Witnesses/Observers: N/A Exhibits Submitted: N/A VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change No change (Character) Change No change (Reason) (Board member names available upon request) IX. 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 evidence of record shows that the approving authority considered nonjudicial punishment from a prior period of honorable service in characterizing the applicant’s discharge. Consideration of such evidence is improper unless the applicant is granted a fully honorable characterization of service. In view of the foregoing, the Board determined that the characterization of service is improper. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. John Zangas, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: Secretarial Authority, Under CH 5, AR 635-200. Other: None RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 21 December 2006 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060002661 Applicant Name: Ms. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages