Application Receipt Date: 060413 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: 050615 Discharge Received: Date: 050927 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct-Abuse of illegal Drugs RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: Company C, 2nd Battalion, 19th Infantry Regiment, Infantry Training Brigade, Fort Benning, GA 31905 Time Lost: AWOL, for a total of 4 days from (050416-050419) Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 740522 Current ENL Date: OAD Current ENL Term: NIF Years ????? Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 8 Mos, 20 Days The applicant was placed on excess leave for a total of 15 days from (050913-050927) Total Service: 0 Yrs, 10 Mos, 14 Days ????? Previous Discharges: ARNGUS-041110-050103/NA (Concurrent Service) Highest Grade: E1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None 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 15 June 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(2) by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense (wrongful use of cocaine on 13 May 2005 and 27 May 2005, assaulted a noncommissioned officer, and AWOL), 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 31 August 2005, the Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the proposed separation action and recommended approval with issuance of a general, under honorable conditions discharge and that the PEBD/Physical disability process be disapproved. On 31 August 2005, the separation authority disapproved the medical/disability process 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 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. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service as modified remains both proper and equitable. Additionally, the analyst did note the applicant's contention in reference to his DD Form 214, and recommend to the Board that the applicant's DD Form 214, items 24, 27 and 28 be administratively corrected to reflect the general, under honorable conditions characterization of service, which was directed by the separation approving authority at the time of the applicant's discharge from the Army. Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's reason for discharge and the characterization of service, the analyst determined that they were both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 14 February 2007 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 found that some one in the discharge process inadvertently entered the wrong information on the applicant's DD Form 214, and voted to direct ARBA-STL to administratively changed the applicant's DD Form 214, to general, under honorable conditions, with a corresponding separation (SPD) code and reentry eligibility (RE) code. Furthermore, Regulations currently in effect list the reason for the applicant’s discharge as misconduct. Accordingly, the Board voted to change the narrative reason on the DD Form 214 to misconduct. Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's reason for discharge and the characterization of service, the Board determined that they were 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: Current standards "Misconduct": under Chapter 14, 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: 16 February 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060005364 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 6 pages