Application Receipt Date: 071205 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. 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: 070227 Discharge Received: Date: 070413 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct, Drug Abuse RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: HHC, 50th Sig Bn, Fort Bragg, NC Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070131, wrongfully used cocaine (061228-070103), reduction to E-5, $1,161 x 2, extra duty for 45 days (FG). Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 720309 Current ENL Date: 060913 Current ENL Term: 2 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 07 Mos, 01Days ????? Total Service: 06 Yrs, 05 Mos, 26 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-001018-050102/HD RA-050103-060912/HD Highest Grade: E-6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 25P2P Microwave System Operator/Maintainer GT: 124 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Afghanistan (030512-031101)/Iraq (041123-051107) Decorations/Awards: JSAM, AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, ACM, GWOTEM, ICM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR, JSUA-2, MUC V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 27 February 2007, 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/drug abuse, he received a Field Grade Article 15 on (070131) for wrongful use of cocaine, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 27 February 2007, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, and submitted a statement in his own behalf. On 27 February 2007, again the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditions discharge, and submitted 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 9 March 2007, the senior intermediate commander (Deputy Bde Cdr) reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended that the case be referred to an administrative separation board, and the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 23 March 2007, the separation authority approved the conditional waiver request, waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The record contains a CID Report of Investigation dated 22 January 2007. 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 found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to fully honorable. The analyst does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The analyst found that the overall length quality of the applicant's service; to include his combat service (2 tours), and the independent medical documentation from the VA Center, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. 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: 6 February 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 5 No change 0 - 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 characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The Board determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, to include his combat service, 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 and 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: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 7 February 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070017819 Applicant Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 pages