Application Receipt Date: 061116 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 930630 Chapter: 8-26g AR: NGB 600-200 Reason: Acts of Patterns of Misconduct - Illegal use of drugs RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: Detachment 1, Co B, 372d Support Bn, Temple TX 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: 630910 Current ENL Date: 880429 Current ENL Term: NIF Years Current ENL Service: 5 Yrs, 02Mos, 02Days Total Service: 5 Yrs, 02Mos, 02Days Previous Discharges: IADT 880608-881207/HD Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 63H10/Track Vehicle Repairer GT: 94 EDU: NIF Overseas: NIF Combat: NIF Decorations/Awards: NIF 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: The evidence shows the applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army National Guard of the State Texas. The evidence indicates that on 16 June 1993, HQ, Military Department, State of Texas, Office of the Adjutant General, Temple, Texas, Orders 118-175 discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date 30 June 1993, with an under other than other conditions discharge. The record does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service). It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-26g, NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct - illegal use of drugs, with a characterization of service of under other than other conditions, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "3." b. Legal Basis for Separation: National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-91 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army National Guard. Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the State Army Reserve National Guard. Paragraph 8-26q (3) of that regulation provides in pertinent part that individuals can be separated for misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant's available records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not contained in the available records. On 16 June 1993, HQ, Military Department, State of Texas, Office of the Adjutant General, Temple, Texas, Orders 118-175 discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date 30 June 1993, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The record contains a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service). It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-26g, NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct - illegal use of drugs, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions, and a Reenlistment Eligibility Code of RE 3. Furthermore, the analyst noted that even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brings discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable or a general under honorable conditions discharge. Furthermore, the U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable. Additionally, eligibility for veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill, does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The analyst noted the applicant's issue regarding employment; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable and recommends to the board to deny releif. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 19 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 0 No change 5 - 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 and voted to deny relief. Case report reviewed and verified by: Chuck Busick, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 21 December 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060016060 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 6 pages