Application Receipt Date: 060419 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: 030929 Discharge Received: Date: 040324 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: Company B, 27th Main Support Battalion, Division Support Command, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 021009/Disrespect to a senior noncommissioned officer/CG Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 781008 Current ENL Date: 020927 Current ENL Term: 02 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05Mos, 28Days ????? Total Service: 06 Yrs, 08Mos, 14Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-970710-000824/HD RA-000825-020926/HD Highest Grade: E5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 88M20 (Motor Transport Operator) GT: 93 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Egypt, Germany Combat: Kosovo (Dates are unknown) Decorations/Awards: AGCM, AAM, GWOTSM, NDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR, KCM 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 4 December 2004, 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 (convened on numerous occasions between 11 January 2001 and 8 January 2003, in reference to reported incidents of emotional and physical abuse of his spouse, leading to recommendation by the Fort Hood Case Review Committee to separate him on more than one occasion due to his failure to demonstrate rehabilitative potential, and for receiving a company grade Article 15 on 9 October 2002 for being disrespectful to a noncommissioned officer), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. Records show on 30 September 2003, the applicant requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and to appearance before that board. 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 3 December 2003, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board. On 7 January 2004, the applicant again consulted with legal counsel, and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by a administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service or description of separation no less favorable than honorable. On 11 February 2004, the applicant again consulted with legal counsel, and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by a administrative separation board. On 20 February 2004, 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 issue he submitted, 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 determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommend the Board vote to deny relief in this case. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 070207 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 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: 070209 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060005580 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages