Application Receipt Date: 060420	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant has stated in essence that he expresses remorse for the actions that led to his separation from the U.S. Army.  He also states that the only misconduct of record happened towards the end of his career.  He further states that since he has left the military, he has been a positive role model for students he taught, and has earned a degree in Information Systems, earned a scholarship from his church, and has taught adult Sunday School.  He has submitted 11 pages of additional documents, five of which pertain to post service accomplishments.

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: 970326
Discharge Received:     Date: 981009   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKA
Unit/Location: Headquarters and Operations Company, 742d Military Intelligence Battalion, 704th Military Intelligence Brigade, Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-5073 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

970410, Memorandum of Reprimand for inappropriate behavior (Administrative).

971211, Letter of Reprimand for inappropriate sexual harassment (Administrative).



Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  611002  
Current ENL Date: Reenl/951026    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 14 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Total Service:  14 Yrs, 3 Mos, 28 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-840612-880218/HD
                                      RA-880219-900815/HD
                                      RA-900816-951025/HD
Highest Grade: E-6
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 98G3L   GT: 143   EDU: 2 Years College   Overseas: Germany, Saudi Arabia   Combat: Kuwait/Saudi Arabia-900829-910326
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM (3), AAM (2), GCM (3), NDSM, SWASM w/ 2 BSS, NCOPDR w/ NUM 2, ASR OSR, KLM
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: Morgan State University, BS, ISS; Employee of the month, Sept 1999, Careers USA; Mt Zion United Methodist Church, Scholarship Award.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 26 March 1998, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct (he received two letters of reprimand for sexual harassment, and a relief for cause Non-commissioned Officer's Evaluation Report), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 30 March 1998, the applicant consulted legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarilly waived consideration of his case by an administration separation board, contingent upon receving a characterization of service no less favorable than an Honorable discharge, 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 23 April 1998, the separation authority disapproved the applicant's request for a conditional waiver.  On 13 May 1998, the applicant again consulted with legal counsel, and voluntarilly waived consideration of his case by an administration separation board, contingent upon receving a characterization of service no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 2 June 1998, the separation authority disapproved the applicant's second request for a conditional waiver.  On 1 May 1998, the applicant was notified to appear before the Administrative Separation Board, and advised of his rights.  On 15 July 1998, the Board met; applicant appeared with counsel.  The Board recommended that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  On 18 September 1998, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts, approved the findings and recommendations of the Board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
      
      The applicant received a Bar to reenlistment certificate approved on (970425) and an NCOER relief for cause on (970317).
       

      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, the issues and independent documents 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: 28 Feburary 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 characterization of service was too harsh and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  The Board determined that the narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.



















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: None
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: 7 March 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060005709

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 7 of 7 pages