Application Receipt Date: 060410 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 enlist into active duty and also, enlist into the Delaware Army National Guard. 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: 981202 Discharge Received: Date: 981224 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: Company A, 110th Signal Battalion, (FC), Fort Detrick, MD 21702 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): The unit commander indicates in his recommendation to discharge the applicant, that he has a Field Grade, Company Grade and a Summarized Article 15; however, they are not part of the available records. Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 771217 Current ENL Date: 960603 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 6 Mos, 22 Days ????? Total Service: 2 Yrs, 6 Mos, 22 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 52D10 Power Generator Equipment Repairer GT: 108 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Korea Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM (2), 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: The applicant's record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to a discharge from the Army. However, the evidence of record shows that on the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12(b), by reason of misconduct—pattern of misconduct, 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 separation authority documentation directing the approval of the discharge action is not part of the available records and the analyst is presuming Government regularity in the discharge process. Furthermore, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense, under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, Paragraph 12c(2), with a corresponding separation code JKK (i.e. abuse of illegal drugs) and a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. On 4 October 1996, Orders 350-1, DA Headquarters, Fort Detrick, Maryland, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date: 24 December 1998. 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 analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. By his misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. Therefore, the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable. However, while reviewing the applicant's record, the analyst did find several administrative errors on the applicant's DD Form 214, item 25, 26, 27 and recommend to the Board that the applicant's separation authority, his separation code and his reentry eligibility (RE) code be changed to reflect the proper recommendation and approval that was initiated by the applicant's chain of command, to Misconduct-Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 12(b) with a corresponding separation code of JKA and a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 3, as determined by AR 601-210. Except for the foregoing modifications to the applicant's DD Form 214, in reference to his separation authority, separation code and reentry eligibility (RE) code, the analyst determined that the reason for separation was both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 6 November 2006 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: None 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, hearing his testimony 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 found that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable, change the separation code (SPD) to "JKA" and the reentry eligibility (RE) code to "3." However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both 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: Change the separation code (SPD) on the DD Form 214, item 26 to "JKA. 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: ESMERALDA G. PROCTOR DATE: 13 November 2006 Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060005288 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages