Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/04/09	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states in effect, that he was accused of domestic violence and although he was innocent the evidence against him said he was guilty.  His wife and he were separated when he went to visit his children after work.  While he was visiting wrestling came on television; he and his children began to wrestle.  His wife joined in the wrestling later.  When he went to leave his wife and he began to argue, she told him she was calling the police and he laughed because he did not feel guilty of anything; so, he sat down outside on the trunk of his car and waited for the police.  When the police arrived they stated that his wife had scratches on her arms and legs and although, the scratches were from his uniform they took him to jail.  He later pled guilty and his sentencing was deferred with no consequence contingent upon him completing a domestic violence program, which he has now done.  Prior to his separation from the Army he was never in trouble; he had never received any negative counseling statements or performance evaluations.  He had never failed an APFT test, and during his deployment he was recommended for two battlefield promotions.  Additionally, he was recommended by his entire command to participate in green to gold and had been asked by his PBO to consider becoming a warrant officer.  The Army was a valuable asset to him and his life.  He considers himself valuable to the mission and is asking for an upgrade so that he may return to the Army.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 100510
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 100610   Chapter: 14, Sec II     AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct, (Civil Conviction)	   RE:     SPD: JKB   Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 555th Engineer Brigade, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington                      

Time Lost: AWOL for 2 days (100316 - 100317), mode of return unknown.

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

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No  ?????

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  22
Current ENL Date: 070619    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2  Yrs, 11 Mos, 20 Days ?????
Total Service:  		2  Yrs, 11 Mos, 20 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92 Y10 Unit Supply Specialist   GT: 121   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (080908 - 090903)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, ACM w/2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None


VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 10 May 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-5, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct, conviction by civil court, for being convicted in the Superior Court of Washington for Pierce County of assault in the fourth degree, domestic violence, and being sentenced to 365 days confinement, which was suspended for two years. In accordance with the Lautenberg Amendment, the applicant was then prohibited from possessing any firearms or ammunition, which created a conflict with his military obligations the unit commander recommended separation from the Army with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 12 May 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and  did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 26 May 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
       
       The record contains case number 10-1-01179-1 from the Superior Court of Washington.

       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 being absent 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; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.   

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of the applicant’s available military records, the issues and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The analyst determined that 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.  
       
       The analyst acknowledges the applicant's in service accomplishments as stated in his application.  However, the analyst did not find this sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue about his desire to rejoin the Service.  However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry (RE) codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  The applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  The analyst found no bases upon which to recommend a change to the applicant’s reentry code.  An RE code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 
       
       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 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: 14 september 2012         Location: Washington, D. C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 and a DD Form 214.

VIII.  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.































        
IX.  Board Decision						
Board Vote:  							          	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request) ?????
								         
X.  Board Action Directed					         
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




ARCHIE L. DAVIS III
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder




















Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20120007231
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 4 pages