Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 080620 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 and documents submitted by the Applicant 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: 070319 Discharge Received: Date: 070514 Chapter: 14-12A AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct, (Minor Infractions) RE: SPD: JKN Unit/Location: A Co, 122nd Aviation Support Bn, 82nd Combat Aviation Bde, Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070307 failure to report on 20 February 2007; willful disobedience of an NCO on 7 March 2007; wrongful involvement in sexual relations with a PVT on 12 February 2007; reduction to E2; forfeiture of $776 of pay per month for two months, suspended and extra duty for 45 days (FG). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 22 Current ENL Date: 060412 Current ENL Term: 4 Years 22 weeks Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 1Mos, 3Days ????? Total Service: 1 Yrs, 1Mos, 3Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92F10 Petroleum Supply Spec GT: 91 EDU: HS grad and currently attending East Georgia College Overseas: SWA Combat: Afghanistan (070120-070405) Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ACM, GWOTSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Swainsboro, GA Post Service Accomplishments: Enlistment in the GA ARNG dated 081030 for 6 years and 46 weeks VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 19 March 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12a, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for disrespect toward two NCOs; failure to report; willful disobedience of an NCO; and wrongful involvement in sexual relations with a PVT, 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 28 March 2007, 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 the applicant’s military records, and the issue and documents submitted with the application, 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 the former Soldier’s 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 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. Therefore, 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: 090423 Location: Atlanta, GA Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA 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: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080008134 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages