Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/03/28	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The Applicant requests an upgrade to honorable because he did his job well and finally came to realize that he had a drug problem back then and he is now trying to do something about it.  He was in a prgram called the Rescue Mission of Roanoke and trying to get his life back together.

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: 010622
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 010806   Chapter: 14-12c     AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: Co A, 62d Eng Bn, Fort Hood, TX 

Time Lost: 3 days, AWOL (010504-010506), surrendered.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 010207, failure to report x 3 (001208, 010220, 010215), reduction to E-2 (suspended), forfeiture of $273 (suspended), 14 days extra duty and restriction (CG)

010321, suspended sentence of reduction to E-2 and forfeiture of $273 was vacated for failure to report (010220)

Date NIF, failure to report (010215), wrongful use of marihuana (010221), wrongful use of cocaine x 2 (010221 and 010509), page 1 of the Article 15 is not contained in the available record (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  31
Current ENL Date: 990729    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 00Mos, 05Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 00Mos, 05Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 62E10/Hvy Constr Eq Opr   GT: 94   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Roanoke, VA
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 22 June 2001, 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 for having received a Filed Grade Article, a Company Grade Article, and several negative counseling statements, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 22 June 2001, the applicant waived his right to consult legal 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 reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  The document that would contain the separation authority’s waiver of further rehabilitative efforts and in which would've directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of an under other than honorable conditions discharge is not contained in the available record.  The analyst presumed government regularity .  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.

       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 his application, 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.  The applicant, by his misconduct and 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 service below that meriting a general or 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.  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: 6 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
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 AR20080005564
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages