Application Receipt Date: 061103 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 050113 Chapter: 14-12c / 8-26e AR: 635-200 / NGR 600-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: B Battery, 1-128th FA, Fort Carson, CO Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier's Overall Record DOB: 800517 Current ENL Date: 020110 Current ENL Term: 8 Years Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 00 Mos, 04 Days Total Service: 03 Yrs, 00 Mos, 04 Days Previous Discharges: RA 020408-020810/ HD Highest Grade: NIF / Applicant claims to have achieved the grade of E4 however, all records only reflect E1. Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 13E10 Cannon Fire Direction Spec GT: NIF EDU: NIF Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR / NDSM / GWOT / AFRM w/M Dev / MO BTSR 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: The evidence of record shows that on 5 April 2005, Orders 092-001, HQ, Missouri Army National Guard, Joint Force HQ, Jefferson City, MO discharged the applicant from the Missouri Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date: 13 January 2005. The record contains a properly constituted DD form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12c(1) by reason of misconduct, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JKQ (i.e., misconduct- serious offense). The specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicant's discharge are not contained in the available records. 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, 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, 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 independent evidence he submitted, the analyst determined that the applicant's available record of service during the period of enlistment under review is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. That DD Form 214 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 12c by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Barring evidence to the contrary, 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 analyst determined 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: 18 December 2007 Location: Washington D.C. 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 0 No change 5 - 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 and considering the analyst's recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. Case report reviewed and verified by: Edgar Yanger, 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: XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 20 December 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060015486 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 pages