Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/05/27	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: 980624
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 980825   Chapter: 14       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: 196th QM Co, Fort Campbell, KY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 971105, fraud against the Government (970516), however, the continuation sheet is not part of the available record; reduction to E-3, forfeiture of 7 days pay $279.23 (CG).

971020, wrongful use of marijuana between (970819-970918), reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $500 x 2 (suspended), extra duty for 45 days (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: 950615    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 02Mos, 11Days ?????
Total Service:  		15 Yrs, 08Mos, 25Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-831205-861202/HD
                                       USARCG-861203-901227/NA
                                       RA-901228-950614/HD
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 77W10 Water Treatment Spec   GT: 120   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii/Haiti   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM-3, AGCM-2, NDSM, AFEM, HSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Conway, SC
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       Evidence of record shows that on 11 June 1998, 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 testing positive during a unit urinalysis, driving under the influence of alcohol and fraud against the Government, with an  under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived consideration of his case by 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 and senior commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 10 August 1998, 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 applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 
       
       The applicant's record contains an approved Bar to Reenlistment dated 19 August 1997.  
       
       The applicant's record contains a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated 10 February 1997, for driving a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol content of.10% or higher (Administrative).  
       
       The applicant's record contains a Military Police Report dated 19 January 1997.

       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 carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the special trust and confidence placed in a non-commissioned officer (NCO).  The applicant, as a NCO, 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 the misconduct diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a general or fully honorable discharge.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant’s issue; even though the applicant claims that his offense was isolated, the analyst concluded that the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct, expected of Soldiers in the Army.  Having examined all the circumstances, the analyst determined that the applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant’s service below that meriting a general or fully honorable discharge.  In view of the foregoing, 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: 11 March 2009         Location: Washington, DC

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: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080008388
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages