Application Receipt Date: 061006 Prior Review Prior Review Date: 970131/Records I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached 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: 940916 Discharge Received: Date: 950112 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: HHC 16th Ordnance Bn, 61st Ordnance Bde, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5001 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 940729-wrongfully use cocaine, on or between (940419) and (940426), (Field Grade). Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 531004 Current ENL Date: 920213 Current ENL Term: 2 Years ext 11 months (930709) Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 11 Mos, 00Days ????? Total Service: 20 Yrs, 01 Mos, 29 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-741114-741226/NA RA-741227-770720/HD RA-770721-800106/HD RA-800107-840102/HD RA-840103-861002/HD RA-861003-920212/HD Highest Grade: E6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 45K3H Armament Repairer GT: 106 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany/Korea Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM (4), AGCM (6), NDSM, NCOPDR (Advanced), ASR, OSR (3), C/Ach (6), COT (3), LOA 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 16 September 1994, 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 cocaine on a unit urinalysis), and that the applicant be retained on active duty, with no recommendation of characterization of service. He was advised of his rights. The applicant's election of rights are not contained in the available record and Government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. It appears that an administrative separation board met, and the applicant appeared with counsel. The applicant's chain of command recommended he be separated from the service with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The board recommended that the applicant be separated from the Army with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. On 11 January 1995, 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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, and the time that has elasped since his discharge mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 4 June 2007 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: No Witnesses/Observers: Brother Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted sixteen pages of additional documents in support of his personal appearance hearing. 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 now inequitable. The Board does not condone the applicant's misconduct; however, determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, circumstances surrounding the discharge, his post service accomplishments and the time that has elasped since his discharge mitigated the discrediting entry 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. However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, voted not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 13 June 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060014172 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages