Applicant Name: ?????

Application Receipt Date: 070821	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See enclosed 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: 040426
Discharge Received:     Date: 040608   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKK
Unit/Location: 9th Psychological Operations Battalion, (Airborne), 4th Psychological Operations Group, Fort Bragg, NC 28310.  

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040324, Wrongfully used MDMA/Methamphetamine, between on or about (040102-040202), reduction to private (E-1), forfeiture of $597.00 pay for two months, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (041120), and extra duty for 45 days (FG). 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Year/Month:  8207  
HOR City, State: ?????
Current ENL Date: 031210    Current ENL Term: 2 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 5 Mos, 29 Days ?????
Total Service:  3 Yrs, 11 Mos, 25 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 000614-031209/HD
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 37F1P PSYOP Specialist   GT: 113   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (030310-030501)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, GCMDL, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states, in effect, that since he has been discharged he went back to school for his bachelors degree in public affairs.  He first went to Clark Community College in Vancouver, WA and maintained a 3.3 grade point average. He is one class short of his associate’s degree and transferred to Washington State University in Vancouver to finished the summer term with a 4.0 grade point average.  He is involved in a student work-study program at the Vancouver Veterans Hospital and assist homeless vets with housing and employment searches. He enjoys his the work he is doing, and with his public affairs degree, he hope to continue working with veterans.  If he was to have his discharge upgraded this would greatly increase his chances of obtaining permanent employment upon graduation from college.  Having an honorable discharge would make his military enlistment complete and complete him as a soldier.  

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 26 April 2004, 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 in that you tested positive for MDMA/DMET on 2 February 2004, which resulted in you receiving a Field Grade Article 15, with an honorable discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, indicated in his election of rights that he would submit  a statement in his own behalf; however, that particular statement is not part of the available record.  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 an honorable discharge.  On 12 May 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.  
      
      
      
      

      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, documents and the issue he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The analyst found that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, and the chain of commands recommendation for an honorable characterization of service mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 5 September 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: 	       	Proper	 	Improper	
						Equitable	 	Inequitable	

DRB voting record:  		      Change 1    No change 4   - 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: 11 September 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070011762
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 5 pages