Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/11/04	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "after returning from Iraq my life was moving very fast.  I now had a daughter to care for along with a new bride.  At first I sought counseling because I was experiencing nightmares, and was having trouble sleeping.  From there my demeanor at home was becoming more and more hostile.  After a few sessions at the TMC I was feeling better.  I soon discovered I was expecting a son.  To help offset bills and other funds I got a local job delivering pizzas.  I worked there almost every day after duty.  One of the coworkers was an E6.  I became somewhat friends with him and soon discovered he was in the business of selling drugs.  He offered them to me and I accepted.  It was the wrong decision and I am now paying for it every day.  I don’t blame anyone but myself, but I did try to make everything better, I worked with CID in stopping this individual, and I attended rehab services from the Army.  I knew when I was demoted I had a long way to go to repair my once good reputation.  The Brigade Commander eventually decided a few months later that I was to be discharged.  I served my country honorably in OIF 2 and was proud of it.  Please review this and understand that I was a good Soldier and gave the Army everything I had and was prepared to die for it.  I just want to be able to tell my kids I was honorably discharged.  Thank you and have a nice day."

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 060629
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 061110   Chapter: 14-12c(2)      AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: Headquarters Service Battery, 2nd Battalion, 11th Field Artillery, 2nd Brigade, 25th Infantry Division, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060320, wrongfully used cocaine, a controlled substance (060127 -  060202); wrongful previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor or drugs - incapacitated for the performance of duty (060210); reduction to E-2; forfeiture of $713.00 pay per month for two months, suspended to be automatically remitted if not vacated (060924); extra duty for 45 days; restriction to the limits of the barracks, dining facility, medical facility, place of duty, and place of worship for 45 days, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated (060924); (FG).

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  22
Current ENL Date: 050418    Current ENL Term: 6  Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	0  Yrs, 6 Mos, 12 Days ?????
Total Service:  		3  Yrs, 7 Mos, 9   Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 030402 - 050417/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13D10 Field Artillery Automated Tactical Data System Specialist    GT: 117   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii, SWA   Combat: Iraq (040111 - 050111)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM,  ASR, OSR x 2, CAB

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 29 June 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, for wrongfully using cocaine, a controlled substance (060127 - 060202), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 29 June 2006, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board, unless recommended for an under, other than honorable discharge, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       The separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant’s discharge 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 of this regulation 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; however, a general, 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 submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade to the applicant's characterization of discharge.  
       
       The analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because his quality of service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a Soldier.  The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies.  By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished his quality of 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.   
       
       The analyst acknowledges the applicant’s in-service accomplishments, combat tour of duty and considered the quality of his service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the incident of misconduct documented under Article 15 of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice.
       
       The analyst noted that even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. 
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 9 May 2012         Location: Washington, D. C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: On-line application and a DD Form 214

VIII.  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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.
































 
        
IX.  Board Decision						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: 
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder



















Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20110022225
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 4 pages