Application Receipt Date: 060330 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant stated in essence that untrue statements by family advocacy and his command that were placed in his file, resulted in his discharge and that he was not able to talk to his command about the statements. He further states that he had good NCOERs and was a good soldier. The applicant submitted several copies of correspondence between the Family Advocacy and the Unit Commander in Korea; selected pages of records of medical care; a copy of orders to Fort Hood, dated 26 June 1999; and a copy of AFZF-JA-TDS, Defense Counsel letter, dated 2 July 2003. 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: 030314 Discharge Received: Date: 030905 Chapter: 14-12c(2) AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: Delta Battalion Support Command, 15th Forward Support Battalion, Division Suport Command, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, Texas 76544 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: 640210 Current ENL Date: Reenl/001201 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 9 Mos, 5 Days ????? Total Service: 17 Yrs, 5 Mos, 17 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-860319-890724/HD RA-890725-900820/HD RA-900821-930310/HD RA-930311-960131/HD RA-960201-001130/HD Highest Grade: E-5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 63B20, H8 Light Weight Vehicle Mechanic GT: 103 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Korea/Southwest Asia/EURA-Germany Combat: Saudia Arabia (901205-910421) Decorations/Awards: GCML (3), NDSM (2), SWASM w/3 BSS, NCOPDR, ASR OSR (2), KLM (K), KLM (SA) V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None were submitted. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 14 March 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense/domestic abuse (you were involved in a domestic dispute in which you caused bodily injury to a female family member by striking her on and about the head, face and body; an established history of domestic violence that has been substantiated by the Family Advocacy Programs at Fort Hood, Texas x2, in December 1999 and 21 October 2001; Fort Carson, Colorado x2, in October 1994, and 1996; Korea, in April 1998, and El Paso County, Colorado; a conviction for domestic violence in El Paso County, Colorado, on 8 April 1997), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested consideration of his case by an Administrative Separation Board, and did not submit a statement on his 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. On 23 June 2003, the Administrative Separation Board met; applicant appeared with counsel. The Board found that the evidence relating to the conviction for domestic violence in El Paso County, Colorado on 8 April 1997 should be changed to a 'plea of nolo contendre to deferred judgement of menancing.' The Administrative Separation Board recommended that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. On 5 August 2003, the separation authority approved the finings and recommendations of the Administrative Separation Board and directed that the applicant be separated with issuance of a General Under Honorable Conditions discharge. 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, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found 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 his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. By his misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his 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 found that the characterization of service and the reason for discharge were both proper and equitable and recommends the Board vote to deny relief in this case. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 31 January 2007 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 Board determined that the applicant's separation code on the DD Form 214 was incorrect. Accordingly the Board voted to administratively change the SPD code on the applicant's DD Form 214, item # 26, to "JKQ." Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's SPD code, the Board determined that the characterization of service and the narrative reason for separation was both proper and equitable. 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: None Other: Change the SPD Code on the applicant's DD Form 214, Item # 26, to "JKQ." 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: 2 February 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060004598 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages