Application Receipt Date: 061124 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. 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: 051018 Discharge Received: Date: 060404 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (Civil Conviction) RE: SPD: JXB Unit/Location: B Det, 203 PSB, Fort Richardson, AK 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: 760614 Current ENL Date: 030813 Current ENL Term: 4 Years Item 12a on the applicant's DD Form 214, date entered active duty this period is incorrect, should read (010321), see enlistment contract. Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 07 Mos, 22 Days Total Service: 11 Yrs, 06 Mos, 29 Days Previous Discharges: USMC-940906-980905/HD USMCR-980906-010320/NA RA-010321-030812/HD Highest Grade: E5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 42L20 Administrative Spec GT: 111 EDU: 14 Years Overseas: Alaska Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM-2, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, AFSM, NM, NSSDR 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 18 October 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-conviction by civil court (he was convicted in the District Court for the State of Alaska of attempted assault in the third degree, a Class A misdemeanor), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 1 November 2005, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon him being retained in the United States Army. The applicant submitted a statement on his own behalf. The unit commander's memorandum subsequently recommending separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts is not part of the record and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. The intermediate and senior commander's reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 15 December 2005, the separation authority disapproved the applicant's conditional waiver of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon him being retained in the United States Army. On 10 January 2006, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. On 8 February 2006, the administrative separation board convened. The applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended that the applicant be discharged with issuance of a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. On 24 February 2006, the separation authority approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board 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, 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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant's characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant's characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service; the circumstances surrounding his discharge, and a statement from a security guard involved in the incident attesting that he was not truthful in the police statement he submitted and a statement from the North Star Security Agency, stating that an internal investigation revealed that the guard made several false accusations and his employment was terminated as a result, mitigated the discrediting entrie in his service record. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 21 December 2007 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 5 No change 0 - 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 characterization of service was was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060016234 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 6 pages