Application Receipt Date: 060713	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents.

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: 990219
Discharge Received:     Date: 990521   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKQ
Unit/Location: 664th Ordnance Company, 553rd CSB, Fort Hood, TX 76544-5056 

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:  680717  
Current ENL Date: 960829    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 08 Mos, 23 Days ?????
Total Service:  12  Yrs, 00 Mos, 08 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-870514-881129/HD
                                      RA-881130-920705/HD
                                      RA-920706-960828/HD
Highest Grade: E6
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 55B1H Ammunition Spec   GT: 104   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Alaska/
Somalia/Germany/Bosnia   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM (4), AAM (2), AGCM (3), NDSM, AFEM, AFSM, NCOPDR w/2, ASR, OSR (3), NM (Bosnia), JMUA, C/Ach (12), COT (10)  
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 19 February 1999, 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 (indicted for indecency with a child by exposure on 29 May 1998), with an honorable 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 contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than honorable, and submitted a statement in his own behalf.  On 19 April 1999, the board met, applicant appeared with counsel.  The board recommended that the applicant be separated from the service because of misconduct-  commission of a serious offense, and that his service be characterized as under other than honorable conditions.  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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The senior commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 5 May 1999, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the board, waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of an under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 
      
      A Bar To Reenlistment was approved on 15 October 1998. 
      
      

      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 issues and documents he submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct.  The analyst does not condone the  applicant's misconduct, however, determined that the characterization was too harsh, and as a result, it is inequitable.  The analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service,  mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable.  This action entails a restoration of grade to SSG/E6.    

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 18 July 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 1    No change 4   - 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, voted to deny relief.



















 

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: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 31 July 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060009825

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages