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: Philadelphia, PA 19139
Current Address: 154 Headstart Lane
Dover DE 19901
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