Application Receipt Date: 060927 Prior Review Prior Review Date: 010516/Record I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293 and supporting document. 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: 980605 Discharge Received: Date: 980724 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKB Unit/Location: 42th Military Police Detachment, 16th Military Police Brigade, Fort Bragg, NC Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Letter of Reprimand: The applicant received a Company Grade Letter of Reprimand on (920406), for instructing a (SPC) to operate his privately owned vehicle while intoxicated. Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 590629 Current ENL Date: 901025 Current ENL Term: 06 Years (Extended enlistment 21 months on (960724), for a new ETS of (980724). Current ENL Service: 07 Yrs, 09Mos, 00Days ????? Total Service: 20 Yrs, 01Mos, 04Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-780621-820615/HD RA-820616-850407/HD RA-850408-901024/HD Highest Grade: E6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 63B10 (Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic) GT: 109 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany, Korea Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM (4th Award), AGCM (6th Award), NDSM, HSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR (3d Award), 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 29 June 1998, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense ( applicant was convicted in the General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division in the State of North Carolina, Cumberland County of felony child abuse, and indecent liberties with a child. He was sentenced to 20-24 months confinement, suspended for 60 months for the offense of indecent liberties with a child and 20-33 months confinement and a $1000.00 fine, suspended for 60 months for the offense of felony child abuse), with an under other than 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 in 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 14 July 1998, the applicant was notified to appear before a board of officers. The board met; applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 20 July 1998, the separation authority recommended approval of the board’s findings and recommendation for separation with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 20 July 1998, the staff judge advocate recommended that the applicant’s case be forwarded to PERSCOM for final determination with a recommendation for approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 24 July 1998, the Assistant Secretary of The Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs approved the recommendation for separation with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant has a CID Report of Investigation dated 14 January 1997, in his Official Military Personnel File and a approved Bar to Reenlistment dated 9 July 1997. 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 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 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 or general 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. Furthermore, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 2 July 2007 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: Mr. William Cassara PO Box 2688 Evans, GA 30809 Witnesses/Observers: Ms. Theletha Sanford/ Fiancee Exhibits Submitted: None 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 3 No change 2 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - 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, hearing his testimony 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 now inequitable. The Board determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service and his post service accomplishments, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it. This action does entail a grade restoration to staff sergeant/E6. 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: SSG XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 11 July 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060013817 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 6 pages