Application Receipt Date: 060124 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293, with attachments. The applicant stated that he was a model soldier up until the incident resulting in his record of misconduct and that he has been a good citizen since his discharge. 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: 960817 Discharge Received: Date: 960906 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: B Battery, 5th Battalion, 2nd Air Defense Artillery, APO AE 09139 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 960805 - wrongfully used marijuana (between on or about 960429 and 960528)/FG Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 660130 Current ENL Date: 950801 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 1 Mos, 5 Days ????? Total Service: 3 Yrs, 10 Mos, 3 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-921104-950731/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 77F10, Petroleum Supply Specialist GT: 95 EDU: GED Overseas: Germany (960111-990110) Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM (3), GCML, NDSR, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: Letters of character reference (3), Employee evaluation (1), Certificates of Appreciation Jefferson School District (3), California DMV record of driving history (1). VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 30 June 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct - commission of a serious offense (wrongfully used marijuana between on or about 29 April 1996 and 28 May 1996), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. 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 service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 17 August 1996, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. CID Investigation report dated 10 June 1996. 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, and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst noted that the unit commander used “Board Procedures” when notifying the applicant that he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct. By using “Board Procedures” the authority for approval of the applicant’s separation rested with the General Court-Martial Convening Authority. The evidence of record shows that someone other than the General Court-Martial Convening Authority approved the applicant’s discharge. In view of the foregoing, the discharge was improper. Accordingly, full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority is recommended. This action does not entail a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code; however, the Board can consider it. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 6 December 2006 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 discharge was and is improper. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority. This action does not entail a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code. 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: Secretarial Authority, under provision of Chapter 5, AR 635-200. 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: 8 December 2006 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060001360 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages