Application Receipt Date: 060524 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached 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: 030305 Discharge Received: Date: 030530 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: B Company, 2d Battalion, 8th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 730625 Current ENL Date: 021104 Current ENL Term: 02 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 06Mos, 27Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 03Mos, 09Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-000222-021103/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 19K10 (M1 Armor Crewman) GT: 099 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM (2d Award), NDSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: State's that he has stayed out of trouble since his discharge, been employed full time and has passed multiple drug test. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 5 March 2003, 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 (testing positive on three different occasions during a urinalysis test; twice for marijuana and once for cocaine), with a under other than 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. Records show the applicant requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and to appearance before that board. 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 20 March 2003, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board. On 12 May 2003, the applicant again consulted with legal counsel, and voluntarily waived consideration of his case by a administrative separation board. On 15 May 2003, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade/rank. 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, 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 evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. 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 analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommend the Board vote to deny relief in this case. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 28 March 2007 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 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 determined that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. The Board determined that the applicant's length and quality of service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge 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. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it. The action does entail a grade restoration to specialist four/E4. 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: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: E4 XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 2 April 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060007414 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages