Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 081113	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 and 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: 010917
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 011024   Chapter: 14-12C(2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: 557th Maintenance Co, NTC Corps Support Bn, Ft. Irwin, CA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 010814 wrongfully use marijuana on or about 010526 and 010625; at Ft. Irwin, CA: fail to go at time prescribed to your appointed place of duty on or about 010501; at Ft. Irwin, CA: willfully disobey a lawful command from a superior commissioned officer on or about 010521 and  010606; at Ft Hood, TX: with intent to deceive make a false official statement to a superior NCO, on or about 010501 at Ft. Irwin, CA: reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $521.00 of pay per month for two months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 990928    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 0Mos, 27Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 0Mos, 27Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 63H10 Track Veh Repairer   GT: 112   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None    Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Barstow, CA
Post Service Accomplishments: Nothing provided by the Applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 17 September 2001, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for illegal drug abuse (marijuana), with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant 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 27 September 2001, 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.  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, and the issue and documents 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. Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.The record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  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.
           Notwithstanding the propriety of the Applicant's discharge, the analyst noted that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the Applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, Reentry Code, as RE 3.  Seperation Program Designator (SPD/Reentry (RE) Codes Cross-Reference Table, dated 15 June 2006, specifies the RE Code for SPD KFS, which the Applicant received, shall be RE 4.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst recommends to the Board that an administrative change be made to block 27 to reflect RE 4.  Except for the foregoing modification to the Applicant's characterization of service and the separation code, the analyst determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable.
          

 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 090826         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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080018227
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages