Application Receipt Date: 060921	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. 

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: 051128
Discharge Received:     Date: 060128   
Chapter: 14-12c(2)    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKK
Unit/Location: B Battery,1-33 FA, APO AE  

Time Lost: Military Confinement for 25 days (051103-051127)

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment):050620, wrongful use of marijuana (050304-050404), reduced to E-2, forfeiture of $692, 45 days restriction and extra duty, and a verbal admonition (FG). 

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051103, SCM, failure to report and disrespectful in language and deportment (050728), wrongful use of marijuana x 2 (050715 and 051020), wrongfully communicate a threat (050728), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $692, and confinement for 30 days.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  820905  
Current ENL Date:  020613 Current ENL Term: 3 Years  
Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 06Mos, 21Days      
Total Service:  03 Yrs, 06Mos, 21Days      
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92F10/Petroleum Supply Spec   GT: 96   EDU: GED   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (040210-050308)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM, ASR, MUC, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, OSR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: London, KY 
Current Address: P.O. BOX 192 
London KY 40741
Post Service Accomplishments: None

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

a.  Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 28 November 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commision of a serious offense for using marijuana, and disrespecting and threatening a noncommisioned officer, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with 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 commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 25 January 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

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 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 or general 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 to the board to deny relief.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date:                        
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




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 2    No change 3   - Character
		 			      Change 0    No change 5   - Reason
					      (Board member names available upon request)

IX.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
The Board carefully examined the available records for the period of enlistment under review.  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.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the Board was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

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.  

Case report reviewed and verified by: David Loy, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade:      

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

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

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 12 December 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder