Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 080502	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 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: 070425
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070511   Chapter: 14-12c(2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: HHC, 120th AG BN, Ft. Jackson, SC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070208, Failure to go (x 2) at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 9 & 11 January 2007, Failure to obey an NCO on or about 5 January 2007, Made a false statement with the intent to deceive on 5 January 2007 and, Unlawfully struck another Soldier on or about 5 January 2007; Reduction to E3, forfeiture of $864.00 pay per month for two months of which $864.00 pay for one month suspended and automatically remitted if not vacated before 8 April 2007 and, extra duty for 14 days (FG).

070329, Vacation of suspension for unlawfully striking another Soldier on or about 25 March 2007; Forfeiture of $864.00 pay per month for one month (FG).

070404, Wrongfully used marijuana between on or about 24 February 2007 and on or about 26 March 2007; Reduction to E1, forfeiture of $601.00 pay per month for one month, extra duty for 7 days (FG).

060622, Failure to obey an NCO on or about 1 June 2006; Reduction to E3,(suspended), forfeiture of $394.00 (CG).


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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  17 years, 11 months and 15 days
Current ENL Date: 030707    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03  Yrs, 10 Mos, 10 Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 10 Mos, 10 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 42F  Info Sys Mgt Spec   GT: 110   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Republic of Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Dade City, FL
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed by the Applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 25 April 2007, the unit commander notified the Applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for wrongfully using marijuana on or about 24 February 2007 to on or about 26 March 2007, willfully disobeying an NCO on or about 1 June 2006, failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 9 & 11 January 2007 and, willfully disobeying an NCO, making a false official statement and assaulting another Soldier on or about 5 January 2007, with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  The Applicant was advised of his rights, consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, 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 a general under honorable conditions discharge.  On 7 May 2007, 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 the Applicant’s military records, and the issue submitted with the 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 the former Soldier’s service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the misconduct, the Applicant diminished the quality of 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 U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges.  Each case is decided on its own merits when an Applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge.  Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.  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: 20 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: No Change
Other: No Change										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080007205
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages