Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/03/17	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 and supporting documents submitted by the Applicant.

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: 060513
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060720   Chapter: 14-12c    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: HHC, 3d Bn, 1 SF Group, Fort Lewis, WA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060211, wrongful use of marijuana (051127-051227), reduction to E-5, forfeiture of $1137 x 2, 45 days extra duty and restriction (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: 000522    Current ENL Term: 6  Years  3 months (includes extension of service)
Current ENL Service: 	06 Yrs, 01Mos, 29Days ?????
Total Service:  		06 Yrs, 01Mos, 29Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-6		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 18EV2/Special Forces Commo NCO   GT: 111   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan   Combat: Iraq (051227-060607), Afghanistan (050214-050717)
Decorations/Awards: JSCM, AAM-2, NDSM, AFGHCM, ICM, GWOTSM, KDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, CIB, SF TAB, RGR TAB, CAB

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Arnold, CA
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 13 May 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—serious offense for wrongful use of marijuana (051127-051227), by a positive urinalysis and by his self admission, he recommended retention and if not approved an honorable discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 25 May 2006, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested an Administrative Separation Board in the event that retention was not approved, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended retention in the service and if this was not approved recommended an honorable discharge.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended retention in the service or an honorable conditions discharge if retention was not approved.  On 9 June 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.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  It states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor, and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service is so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.  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, the issue, and the documents submitted with his  application, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the overall length and quality of the applicant's service to include his two combat tours and the recommendations from his immediate commanders for retention or an honorable discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry in the service record.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 13 February 2009         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

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 characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service to include his two combat tours and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 3    No change 2
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080004277
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages