Application Receipt Date: 070228	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: Personal Appearance/061208

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

Issues: The applicant stated in effect that he regretted his record of misconduct and asked for a reconsideration of a previous Board decision due to not having submitted all documents relative to proof of his case.  He submitted a divorce decree, a court decree of joint custody, travel orders, documents pertaining to his military service, and three lettters of personal reference.

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: 040130
Discharge Received:     Date: 040311  (On 8 December 2006, the applicant's case was heard by the ADRB and upgraded to Honorable)   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKK
Unit/Location: Company A, 3d Psychological Operations Battalion, Fort Bragg, NC 28310 

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:  710622  
Current ENL Date: Reenl/020910    Current ENL Term: 2 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 5 Mos, 2 Days ?????
Total Service:  3 Yrs, 9 Mos, 26 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA-00517-020909/HD
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 21L1P, Lithographer   GT: 97   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM (2), AGCM, NDSM, ASR, OSR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: Employment documents, letters of reference from employers and an active duty SSGT.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 30 January 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, commission of a serious offense/abuse of illegal drugs (he tested positive for cocaine), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not 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 3 February 2004, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
      
      CID Investigation Report dated 15 December 2003.
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

      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 issue he submitted, the analyst found that 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: 5 March 2007              
Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: N/A




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
The President, on the motion of the Army Discharge Review Board, reconsidered the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review.  The applicant submitted new, substantial and relevant evidence, which was not available to the Board at the time of original review.  After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service, the new documentation submitted by the applicant, and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the narrative reason for the discharge was 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, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the narrative reason for the discharge to Secretarial Authority.  This action entails a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to "1."  

















Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. John Zangas, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: Secretarial Authority, under Ch 5, AR 635-200
Other: NOTE:  In accordance with DODI 1332, April 4, 2004, the applicant's case was reconsidered, based on his presentation of new, substantial, relevant evidence not available at the time of the original review.  Board members original vote changed the narrative reason for discharge to Secretarial Authority, and the reentry eligibility (RE) code to "1" from "4."
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

ROBERT L. HOUSE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 7 March 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070003250

Applicant Name:  Mr.     
______________________________________________________________________


Page 6 of 6 pages