Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/02 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached document 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: 060222 Discharge Received: Date: 060615 Chapter: 4-2b AR: 600-8-24 Reason: Unacceptable Conduct RE: SPD: JNC Unit/Location: B Co, FSC, 115th FSB, Fort Hood, TX Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050801, Wrongfully maintaining a personal relationship with a noncommissioned officer between (041001 and 050501); wrongfully having sexual intercourse with an noncommissioned officer between (041001 and 050501); disobeying a lawful command from her superior commissioned officer between (041001 and 050501); making a false statement x 2 (050503 and 050503), forfeiture of $1171.00 pay per month for one month and a written reprimand, (GO). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 23 Current ENL Date: 040110/OAD Current ENL Term: 03 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 05Mos, 06Days ????? Total Service: 02 Yrs, 10Mos, 02Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-030814-040109/NA Highest Grade: O1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 88A/Transportation, Gen GT: NA EDU: BA Degree Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (040723-050316) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, ICM, GWOTSM V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 22 February 2006, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2, AR 600-8-24, by reason of misconduct, moral or professional dereliction. The applicant was directed to show cause for retention on active duty after acts of personal misconduct and derogatory information. She was advised that she could submit a voluntary resignation in lieu of elimination or submit a rebuttal and request an appearance before a Board of Inquiry. The applicant's resignation in lieu of elimination memorandum and the applicant's chain of commands recommendations are not contained in the available record and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process. On 22 February 2006, Commander, HQ, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX, recommended the applicant be eliminated with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 10 May 2006, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The applicant's record contain's a General Officer's letter of reprimand for maintaining an adulterous relationship with a married noncommissioned officer between (041001 and 050501). b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 600-8-24 sets forth the basic authority for Officer Transfers and Discharges. Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the term of service under review, the issues, and the documents submitted, the analyst determined that the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. 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 Army Officers. By her misconduct at the time of discharge, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant provided no significant 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 in-service 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. In view of the foregoing, 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: 17 March 2010 Location: Washington, DC 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 during the term of service 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 AR20090006189 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages