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 DD Form 293 and attached 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: 030115
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 030213   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: 3rd SF Group, Ft Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 010928    Current ENL Term: 06 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 04 Mos, 15 Days ?????
Total Service:  		04 Yrs, 07 Mos, 00 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 980714-010927/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31C/Radio Operator/Maintainer   GT: 97   EDU: HS   Overseas: None   Combat: Award recommendation mentions service in Enduring Freedom.
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, GCMDL, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Onalaska, WI
Post Service Accomplishments: None provided

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 8 January 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct – You submitted a urine sample on 14 August 2002 and another one on 18 October 2002, both of which tested positive for THC with an other than honorable discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board 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 commander (s) reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an other than honorable discharge.  On 16 January 2003, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  
       
       The record contains a GOMOR dated 13 December 2002.

       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 the entire applicant’s military records, and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit a partial upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  The analyst does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, 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 length of the applicant's service to include the former soldier’s combat service  mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.  This action entails a restoration of grade to SPC/E-4.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: January 22, 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: None

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 combat service 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 general, under honorable conditions.  The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  The board voted a restoration of grade to the rank to SPC/E-4.











        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 5    No change 0
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: No Change
Other: No Change										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: SPC/E-4
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080004399
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages