Application Receipt Date: 2006/09/08	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD293 with attachments

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: 030707
Discharge Received:     Date: 031216   
Chapter: 14, paragraph 12c(2)    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKK
Unit/Location: B/299th FSB, APO AE 09226 (Schweinfurt) 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 030626, Field Grade Article 15, Wrongful use of Marijuana (positive urinalysis between  030323-030422),  reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $645 per month for two months (suspended) 45 days extra duty, 45 days restriction.

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  771023  
Current ENL Date: 980922    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 05 Yrs, 02Mos, 25Days ?????
Total Service:  05 Yrs, 02Mos, 25Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 27E10/Electronics Missile System Repairer   GT: 109   EDU: HS   Overseas: Germany   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, GCM, NDSM, ASR, OSR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant indicates he has graduated from college with a diploma in Computer and Electronic Engineering and has held a steady job for over a year, attends church regularly, and has become an outstanding citizen.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 7 October 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 for wrongful use of marijuana.  The unit commander recommended retention and if not, approval of a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was advised of his rights and declined to consult with legal counsel, acknowledged he understood the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 8 December 2003, 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, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is 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 independent evidence he submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board 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 inequitable.  The overall length and quality of the applicant's service , his post service accomplishments, and the unit commander's recommendation for retention mitigated the single discrediting entry in his service record.  However, the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable.    

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 17 October 2007              
Location: Washington, D.C.

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 4    No change 1   - 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 was too harsh and as a result it is inequitable, based on the overall length and quality of the applicant's service and his post service accomplishments  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: Alejandro. Champin, 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: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 22 October 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060012944

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 5 pages