Application Receipt Date: 060711 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293 and supporting documents. 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: 930112 Discharge Received: Date: 930408 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct-Abuse of Illegal Drugs RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: 543d Supply Company, 80th Ordinance Battalion, Fort Lewis, WA 98433-5486 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 921214/Wrongfully used marijuana between (921005 and 921103)/Reduction to E5, forfeiture of $714.00, and 45 days extra duty/Field Grade. Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 600531 Current ENL Date: 910426 Current ENL Term: 04 Years Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 11Mos, 13Days Total Service: 13 Yrs, 05Mos, 03Days Previous Discharges: RA-791106-820614/HD RA-820615-851028/HD RA-851029-910425/HD Highest Grade: E6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 54B2PP5 (Chemical Operations Specialist) GT: 123 EDU: 14 Yrs Overseas: Germany, Southwest Asia Combat: Kuwait (901027-911018) Decorations/Awards: ASR, NDSM, Parachute Badge, NCOPDR (3), OSR (2d Award), AAM (2d Award), AGCM (4th Award), ARCOM, SWASM (w/3 bronze service stars), KLM, Certificate of Appreciation (2) V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Carson City, NV Current Address: 1228 24th Street (11) Vero Beach FL 32960 Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 12 January 1993, 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 abuse of illegal drugs (tested positive for marijuana), 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, 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. On 25 January 1993, the intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge and made a comment that the applicant requested to have his case considered by an administrative separation board. On 11 February 1993, the applicant was notified to appear before an Administrative Separation Board and advised of his rights. On 2 March 1993, the Board met; applicant appeared with counsel. The Board recommended that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. On 31 March 1993, the separation authority 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, supporting documents, 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. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 3 December 2007 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: 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 5 No change 0 - Character Change 5 No change 0 - 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 discharge was inequitable. The Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service to include his combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge, and the time that has elapsed since his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority. This action does not entail a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code. Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Chapter 5, AR 635-200 Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 4 December 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder