Application Receipt Date: 060201 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he would like to attend college and pursue a career in law enforcement. It would make his family proud. 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: 020422 Discharge Received: Date: 020415 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: Company B, 57th Signal Battalion, 3rd Signal Brigade, Fort Hood, TX 76544 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 020219, wrongfully used marijuana on or between (011204-020104) and wrongfully used marijuana again on or about (011225-020125); (Field Grade) Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 791224 Current ENL Date: 001017 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 5 Mos, 29 Days ????? Total Service: 1 Yrs, 5 Mos, 29 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 31F10 MSE Network SW System Operator Maintainer GT: 118 EDU: GED Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR 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: Evidence of record shows that on 22 March 2002, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense (tested positive for marijuana on five different urinalysis), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant waived 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 25 March 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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 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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue he submitted, the characterization of service is improper. The analyst noted that the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a biochemical test that was part of the applicant’s Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) treatment plan. This is limited use information as defined in Chapter 6, AR 600-85. Use of this information mandates award of a fully honorable characterization of service. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. However, the analyst found that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 13 December 2006 Location: Washington, DC 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 and is improper. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Ron Williams, 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: 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: 15 December 2006 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060001810 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages