Application Receipt Date: 060614	

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: 051021
Discharge Received:     Date: 051111   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct, Commission of a Serious Offense
RE:     SPD: JKQ
Unit/Location: A Company, 701st Main Support Battalion, APO AE 

Time Lost: Item 29 ( Dates of Time Lost During the Period) of the applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows no lost time, however, records show that the applicant served 25 days in confinement from 050916-051010 as part of his punishment from a Summary Court-Martial that was adjudged on 050916.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040628/Wrongful use of marijuana on or about 031024 and 031124/Field Grade

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): Summary Court-Martial/050916/Wrongful use of marijuana on or about 050316 and 050322/Reduction to the lowest enlisted pay grade (E1), confinement for 30 days.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  740607  
Current ENL Date: 011113    Current ENL Term: 04 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 11Mos, 29Days ?????
Total Service:  03 Yrs, 11Mos, 29Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 63J10 (Quartermaster & Chemical Equipment Repairer)   GT: 96   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany, Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (040209-050214)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR, OSR, GWOTEM, GWOTSM
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 21 October 2005, 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 (wrongful abuse of illgal 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 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 8 November 2005, 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, 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 recommends the Board vote to deny relief in this case. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 25 April 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 inequitable.  The Board determined that the applicant's overall length of 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.  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: 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: NA

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 4 May 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060008506

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages