Application Receipt Date: 060721	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he feel as if the charachterization of my discharge does not fit my full term of service .  I have seved and became an asset to any unit i was with  I served one overseas tour in Iraq where I earned the drivers badge and an army commendation medal  This incident of misconduct is a isolated  incident , and i feel it should not always characterize my seperation  

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: 060412
Discharge Received:     Date: 060519   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct-Drug Abuse
RE:     SPD: JKK
Unit/Location: E Company, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) (Rear) (Provisional), Fort Campbell, KY  42223 

Time Lost: AWOL, for a total of 14 days, from (15 November 2004 to 29 November 2004).  

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050111, AWOL, (041115-041129), (Art. 15, continuation sheet-NIF), (Field Grade)

2nd Article 15, 060321, Wrongfully used marijuana on or about (060124-060222), (Field Grade)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  800918  
Current ENL Date: 020711    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 9 Mos, 29 Days The applicant net active service this period on the DD Form 214, item 12c is incorrect; should be: 3 Years, 9 Months, 29 Days, the applicant was AWOL, for 14 days, however, the DD Form 214 item 29 (Time Lost) does not reflect this period of AWOL.  
Total Service:  3 Yrs, 9 Mos, 29 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92F10 Petroleum Supply Specialist   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Kuwait/Iraq (030228-040211)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, GCMDL, NDSM, Iraq Campaign Mdl, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR
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 12 April 2006, 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/abuse of illegal drugs (you tested positive during a unit urinalysis for marijuana, and you received a Field Grade Article 15 for this offense), 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.  On 11 May 2006, the separation authority directed that the applicant be released from active duty and transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  
      
      The applicant has a Bar to Reenlistment which was approved on 29 November 2004.  See unit commander's recommendation for separation.  

      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, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The analyst determined that 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.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable.  
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 11 July 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

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 5    No change 0   - 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.  The Board found that the length of the applicant's service, to include his combat service mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial 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, and voted not to change it.  




















Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Ron Williams, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: N/A
Other: N/A
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: N/A

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 20 July 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060010219

Applicant Name:   Mr.       
______________________________________________________________________


Page 6 of 6 pages