Application Receipt Date: 061006	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: 970131/Records

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

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents.

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: 940916
Discharge Received:     Date: 950112   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKK
Unit/Location: HHC 16th Ordnance Bn, 61st Ordnance Bde, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5001 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 940729-wrongfully use cocaine, on or between (940419) and (940426), (Field Grade).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  531004  
Current ENL Date: 920213    Current ENL Term: 2 Years  ext 11 months (930709)
Current ENL Service: 02  Yrs, 11 Mos, 00Days ?????
Total Service:  20 Yrs, 01 Mos, 29 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: USAR-741114-741226/NA
                                      RA-741227-770720/HD
                                      RA-770721-800106/HD
                                      RA-800107-840102/HD
                                      RA-840103-861002/HD
                                      RA-861003-920212/HD
Highest Grade: E6
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 45K3H Armament Repairer   GT: 106   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany/Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM (4), AGCM (6), NDSM, NCOPDR (Advanced), ASR, OSR (3), C/Ach (6), COT (3), LOA 
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 16 September 1994, 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 (tested positive for cocaine on a unit urinalysis), and that the applicant be retained on active duty, with no recommendation of characterization of service.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant's election of rights are not contained in the available record and Government regularity is presumed in the discharge process.  It appears that an administrative separation board met, and the applicant appeared with counsel. The applicant's chain of command recommended he be separated from the service with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The board recommended that the applicant be separated from the Army with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  On 11 January 1995, 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, 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 recommends 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 now inequitable.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, and the time that has elasped since his discharge mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable.    

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 4 June 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: No

Witnesses/Observers: Brother 

Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted sixteen pages of additional documents in support of his personal appearance hearing.




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, hearing his testimony 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 does not condone the applicant's misconduct; however, determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, circumstances surrounding the discharge, his post service accomplishments and the time that has elasped since his discharge 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, 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: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 13 June 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060014172

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages