Application Receipt Date: 060201 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293. 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: 940203 Discharge Received: Date: 940207 Chapter: 7-11c1 AR: 135-178 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: None Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Battery and Service Battery, 3rd Battalion, 15th Field Artillery, Anniston AL 36201-2198 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 9 November 1981-failure to remain awake during guard duty and being absent from his guard post. Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 550909 Current ENL Date: 910801 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 6 Mos, 6 Days ????? Total Service: 16 Yrs, 5 Mos, 4 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA 780905-820903/HD USAR 820904-840822/NA USAR 840905-910731/NA Highest Grade: E5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 31K20, Senior MSG Comsec Clk GT: 90 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany (781227-801209) Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ARCAM (2), GCM, SR, OSR, NCOPDR (2) V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Submitted VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 11 December 1993, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 7, Paragraph 7-11c1, AR 135-178, by reason of misconduct—abuse of illegal drugs ( you tested positive for marijuana on16 October 1993), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 11 December 1993, the unit commander delivered a notification memorandum to the applicant. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, 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 with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The separation approving authority directing the applicant's separation from the U.S. Army Reserve, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions, are not a part of the available records, and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel) provides for the separation of enlisted personnel of the Army Reserve and Army National Guard. Chapter 7 of the regulation, in effect at the time, governed separation for acts or patterns of misconduct, including unsatisfactory participation. The regulation provided that the separation authority could disapprove the commander’s recommendation for discharge for misconduct and direct disposition by other means, disapprove the recommendation for separation for misconduct and direct separation for unsatisfactory performance, or convene a board of officers to determine whether the service member should be separated for misconduct. When discharged under this provision, Army policy states that the characterization of service will normally be under other than honorable conditions. The regulation also permitted the characterization of service as under honorable conditions, but did not authorize the characterization of service as honorable. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the characterization of service 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. While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. The analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service and the time that has elasped since his discharge 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 restoration of rank/grade to SGT/E-5. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 28 March 2007 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 characterization of service was improper. While the Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct, the evidence of record shows that the approving authority considered nonjudicial punishment from a prior period of honorable service in characterizing the applicant’s discharge. Consideration of such evidence is improper unless the applicant is granted a fully honorable characterization of service. In view of the foregoing, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. This action entails restoration of rank/grade to SGT/E-5. 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: None Other: None 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: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 2 April 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060001805 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages