Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 070717 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states in effect, that he wants a change of life, justified by gaining a college education. 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: 959124 Discharge Received: Date: 950222 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: Company B, 741st Military Intelligence Battalion, Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-5941. Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 950105, Wrongfully used marijuana on or between (1 through 30 November 1994), reduction to Private (E-2), extra duty and restrictions for 45 days and a verbal reprimand (FG). Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Year/Month: 7504 HOR City, State: Akron, OH 44320 Current ENL Date: 931118 Current ENL Term: 3 Years With a Medical Waiver approved on (930820). Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 3 Mos, 5 Days ????? Total Service: 1 Yrs, 3 Mos, 5 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 98K10 Non-Morse Interceptor/Analyst GT: 102 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Post Service Accomplishments: See enclosed DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 13 January 1995, 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, 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 7 February 1995, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts 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, documents 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 is too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. The analyst found that the length of the applicant's service and the time that has elapsed since his discharge mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 16 July 2008 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA 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 0 No change 5 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA 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: 25 July 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070009936 ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 4 pages