Application Receipt Date: 060407 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant stated in essence that he was deployed for nearly 21 months to OIF and OEF and that upon his return from deployment, he had to deal with the stress of divorce, establishing a residence and readjustment. He further states that he self referred to alcohol abuse counseling but received no assistance from his unit even though they were aware of his problem. Finally he states that he has served with a private contractor in Afghanistan since his discharge, with an expected future deployment with the same contractor to Nairobi, Kenya. 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: 040816 Discharge Received: Date: 041223 Chapter: 14-12c AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: Company B, 2nd Battalion, 3d Special Forces Group (Airborne), Fort Bragg, NC 28310 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040513-wrongfully used cocaine between (040314-040421)/Field Grade. Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 681201 Current ENL Date: 020123 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 11 Mos, 1 Days ????? Total Service: 18 Yrs, 6 Mos, 17 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-851223-900726/NA RA-900727-940404/HD RA-940405-970105/HD USAR-970106-991221/HD Highest Grade: E6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 18B2V GT: 113 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany, Southwest Asia Combat: Afghanistan (021201-030917), Iraq (030918-031210) Decorations/Awards: JSAM, GCM (2), NDSM (2), GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None were submitted. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 16 August 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—abuse of illegal drugs (he received a field grade article 15 for wrongful use of cocaine), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested consideration of his case by an administration separation board, and submitted 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 13 October 2004, the Administrative Separation Board met; applicant appeared with counsel. The Administrative Separation Board recommended that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions. However, the Administrative Separation Board proceedings are not part of the available records and the analyst is presuming government regularity in discharge process. On 24 November 2004, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the Administrative Separation Board 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, 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 issue he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. 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 inequitable. The analyst found that the circumstances surrounding the discharge, and the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. However, the reason for discharge remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 7 February 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 too harsh and as a result it is inequitable. The Board determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service to include his combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge, and the applicant's post service accomplishments, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. The Board determined that the narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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: 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: 9 February 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060005274 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 6 pages