PART II - APPLICATION DATA (Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy) 1. Character of Discharge: General, Under Honorable Conditions 2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 970729 3. Authority for separation: a. Regulation: Chapter 14, AR 635-200 b. Reason: Misconduct-Abuse of Illegal Drugs 4. Prior review(s): RECORDS/980918 PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review 1. Service data: 2. Awards and decorations: ARCOM AFEM a. Period entered for: 3 Years AAM(3) b. Entry date: 951201 GCMDL(2) c. Age: 25 Years DOB: 700712 HSM d. Educational level: HS Grad SWASMw/2BSS e. Aptitude area score: GT: 118 3. Highest grade achieved: f. Length of Service: E5 1 Year 7 Months 29 Days 4. Performance evaluations: NONE PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued 5. Periods of unauthorized absence: NONE Status Inclusive dates AWOL Mil conf Civil conf Other 6. Nonjudicial punishment: Date Offense(s) 961210 Wrongfully used cocaine (960902) 7. Court-Martial data: NONE a. SCM: Date Offense(s) b. SPCM: Date Offense(s) c. GCM: Date Offense(s) 8. Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge RA 900228 940911 HD RA 940912 951130 HD PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. Evidence of record shows that on 28 January 1997, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD). The applicant was advised of his rights, consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested a hearing by a board of officers, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander recommended separation from the service. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a GD. On 13 May 1997 an administrative separation board convened to hear the applicant’s case, at which the applicant appeared with his counsel. The board recommended separation for misconduct-commission of a serious offense by engaging in the wrongfully use of cocaine with a GD. On 20 June 1997, the separation authority approved the board’s findings and directed that the applicant be discharged with a GD. b. On 29 July 1997, the applicant was discharged with a GD. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 1 year, 7 months, and 29 days of his current enlistment and a total of 7 years, 5 months and 2 days of military service. c. The applicant’s record shows that he reenlisted for the period of service under review on 1 December 1995. At the time of his reenlistment he had completed 6 years, 9 months, and 3 days of honorable service and attained the rank of sergeant/E-5. The applicant had also earned the Southwest Asia Service Medal with two bronze service stars for duty in Saudi Arabia; the Humanitarian Service Medal; the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for service in Haiti; the Army Commendation Medal; and 3 awards of the Army Achievement Medal. The applicant was processed for separation for the illegal use of cocaine based on a positive urinalysis. His case was heard by an administrative separation board which recommended his discharge for commission of a serious offense based on the cocaine use. 2. Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter l4 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, 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. SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS 1. Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel. As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293. 2. Exhibit(s) submitted: A-1: DD Form 293, dated 020731. A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED) SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor ( ) Legal Advisor a. Medical prehearing comments (if applicable): b. Legal prehearing comments (if applicable): PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits 1. Review/hearing information: a. Type requested: ( ) Records review ( X ) Hearing b. Type Held: ( )Records review ( X ) Hearing ( ) Tender Offer c. Review/hearing location and date: Dallas, TX on 10 April 2003. d. Appearance by: Applicant ( X ) Yes ( ) No Counsel ( ) Yes ( X ) No e. Applicant testified: ( X ) Yes ( ) No f. Counsel presentation: ( ) Yes ( X ) No g. Witness(es) testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No 2. Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing: PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS 1. a. Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity: ( X ) Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A of this case report and directive. ( ) Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as follows: ( X ) Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as follows: Board Issues: (2) The characterization of service is too harsh. (3) The narrative reason for separation is inequitable. b. Request: ( X ) Recharacterization ( X ) Change of Reason 2. Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on issues of propriety and/or equity: a. Propriety: The applicant has not submitted an issue of propriety and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an issue of propriety to change the discharge. b. Equity: The parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI, Paragraph 1, above. (2) The issue is accepted. The Board carefully examined the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review. There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infraction of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offense. The Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, determined that the characterization of service was inequitable because the applicant's generally acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty mitigated the discrediting entry in the service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of characterization of service to fully honorable. (3) The issue is accepted. Regulations currently in effect list the reason for the applicant’s discharge as misconduct. Accordingly, the Board voted to change the narrative reason on the DD Form 214 to misconduct. (1) The issue is rejected. Notwithstanding the foregoing decision by the Board, the Board determined that the applicant’s narrative reason for separation, as modified above, is both proper and equitable and requires no further change. 3. Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s): NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote 1. Board conclusion(s): The discharge was: ( X ) Proper. ( ) Improper as to characterization. Change characterization to                                     . ( ) Improper as to reason. Change reason to                         under                      . ( ) Equitable. ( X ) Inequitable as to characterization. Change characterization to Honorable. ( X ) Inequitable as to reason. Change reason to Misconduct under Chapter 14, AR 635-200. ( ) Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should be changed to                      under                         . 2. Voting record: Change No Change Reason 5 0 Characterization 5 0 The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address below. The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right corner of this document. Department of the Army Review Boards Agency ATTN: Promulgation Team 1941 Jefferson Davis Highway, 2nd Floor Arlington, VA 22202-4508 3. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified                            MR. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION SECTION A - DIRECTIVE TO: ARBA Support Division-St Louis Date: 18 April 2003 The Army Discharge Review Board, established under the provisions of Section 30, Public Law 346, 78th Congress, 22 June 1944 and codified as Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553, in the case of the applicant named in Part I directs that the ARBA Support Division-St Louis issue a new DD Form 2l4 to the applicant which reflects the following directed change(s): ( X ) Change characterization of discharge to Honorable. ( X ) Change reason and authority for discharge to Misconduct, Chapter 14, AR 635-200. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: SPURGEON A. MOORE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: JOHN F. LONG Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant INDEX RECORD: AD Number: 2002076894 INDEX NUMBERS: A9218 Date of Review: 030410 A9202 Character of Service: GD A9442 Date of Discharge: 970729 A0113 Authority: AR 635-200 C14 Reason: A6770 Results of Board Action/ Vote/Affirmation: HD 5-0 A PART IX - VOTING RECORD Name  Reason Characterization CHANGE NC HON UHC NC UNCHAR 1. LTC LONG, JOHN F. Mbr  X     X            2. COL MINNIEFIELD, ANITA R. Mbr  X     X            3. COL TALLON, CARYL T. Mbr  X     X            4. Mbr  X     X            5. COL MOORE, SPURGEON A. PO  X     X