Application Receipt Date: 060323 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293. 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: 970820 Discharge Received: Date: 970922 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKA Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Detachment, 62nd Medical Group, Fort Lewis, WA Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 961205/Disobeying a lawful order/CG Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 740327 Current ENL Date: 941004 Current ENL Term: 03 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 11Mos, 19Days ????? Total Service: 04 Yrs, 04Mos, 18Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-000000-931115/NA RA-931116-940325/UNC USAR-940326-941003/NA Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 71G10 (Patient Administrator Specialist) GT: 90 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 20 August 1997, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—patterns of misconduct (being late for formation numerous times, writing numerous checks (2) without sufficient funds, and driving a car without proper insurance), 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 submit 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 11 September 1997, 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, 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 independent evidence she submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the discharge be upgraded to fully honorable. This recommendation was made after full consideration of her faithful and honorable service, as well as her record of misconduct. While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. The analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, the circumstances surrounding her discharge, and the time that has elasped since her discharge, mitigated the discrediting entries in the service record. However, the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 070131 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA 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 Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully 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: Eric S. Moore, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change 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 and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 070202 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060004120 Applicant Name: Ms. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages