Applicant Name: 

Application Receipt Date: 070808	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: I think that my discharge should be changed because I failed an uranalysis test once.  We had people in my unit that failed the urinalysis test more than once and they remained in the US Army until their contract was done.  I also went from E-4 to E-1 and I was the only one out of about 5 people to lose that much rank.  Their was an NCO that failed the urinalysis test and he lost one rank.  I thought NCO's were held to higher standards and expected if anyone was to lose all of their rank it would be him because he is held to higher standards than I was and he also remained in the Army.   I also think it should be changed due to the fact that I only had one month left before I was going to start clearing post.  I have completed two tours in Iraq and I also paid the money for my G.I. Bill.  I think by them choosing to discharge me was cruel and heartless.   I have never had an Article 15 before this and this was my first time.  I completed my thirty-days of extra duty in February.  I didn't get into any more trouble.  I found out in early April that I was being kicked out of the Army.  I tried to get some kind of answer as to why I was being kicked out due to the fact  that I completed my punishments and I haven't been in any more trouble.  I got no response.  I think they should have allowed me to remain in the Army for the remainder of my contract so I could receive my benefits so I can better myself since the Army didn't work out for me.  I know what I did was wrong but it was a mistake and I think that since I completed almost all of my term they should have helped me more and looked at it as a mistake since I was in for so long without ever failing an uranalysis test or receiving an Article 15.

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: 060404
Discharge Received:     Date: 060413   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKK
Unit/Location: 24th Trans Co, 541st CSSB, Fort Riley, KS 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 041014, Disobeying lawful order from a noncommissioned officer (040914), reduction to E-3 (suspended), forfeiture of $382.00 pay (suspended), and 14 days extra duty, (CG).

060118, Wrongful use of marijuana between on or about (051029 and 051128), and wrongful possession of some amount of marijuana on or about (051119), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $636.00 pay per month for two months, and 45 days extra, (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Year/Month:  1983/07  
HOR City, State: Greenwood, MS
Current ENL Date: 020627    Current ENL Term: 04 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 09Mos, 27Days ?????
Total Service:  03 Yrs, 09Mos, 27Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 88M10/Motor Transport Operator   GT: 101   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (041226-051117)
Decorations/Awards: AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, ICM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 4 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—abuse of illegal drugs for the wrongful use of marijuana, wrongful possession of marijuana, and disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions, 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.  A memorandum for record dated 7 April 2006, from the Trial Counsel, makes reference to the intermediate commander being briefed by the unit commander of the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 7 April 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
      
      The applicant's record contains a Military Police Report dated 20 November 2005.

      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 during the period of enlistment under review and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  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 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. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue that his discharge was based on a single incident, however, that 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, brings discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  In view of the foregoing, 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: 1 August 2008              
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 0    No change 5   - 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 discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted to deny relief.























								        
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: NA

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

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

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 1 August 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070010909
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 6 pages