Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/01/31	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: 080326, Deny, 5-0  

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: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060314   Chapter: 12       AR: 135-178
Reason: Abuse of Illegal Drugs	   RE:     SPD: NIF   Unit/Location: 430th Transportation Co, Baltimore, MD 

Time Lost: NIF

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  43
Current ENL Date: 000716    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	5 Yrs, 08Mos, 03Days ?????
Total Service:  		30 Yrs, 06Mos, 18Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 750724-780901/NA
                                        USAR 780902-940730/NA
                                        RA 940731-000715/NA
Highest Grade: E8		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 88Z50 Transportation Supervisor   GT: 96   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, AFRMx2, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Glen Burnie, MD
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The applicant’s record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the United States Army Reserve.  The unit commander's notification letter to the applicant initiating separation action from the United States Army Reserve, the applicant's chain of command's recommendation for approval of the separation action and his election of rights signed by the applicant and an officer from the Judge Advocate General's office are not part of the available record, and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. However, the evidence of record shows that on 29 November 2005, the applicant was notified to appear before a board of officers and advised of his rights.  On 3 December 2005, the administrative separation board met, the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended that the applicant be separated with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The board did not recommend that the applicant's separation action be suspended.  On 15 February 2006,  DA, HQ, 99th Regional Readiness Command, Coraopolis, Pennsylvania, Orders 06-046-00003, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date:  14 March 2006, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel) provides for the separation of enlisted personnel of the Army Reserve and Army National Guard.  Chapter 12 of this regulation defines misconduct by reason of one or more of the following:  minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense (to include abuse of illegal drugs,) and conviction by civil authorities.  The service of a Soldier discharged for reasons indicated in paragraph 12-1, will normally be characterized as under other than honorable conditions.  If warranted by the Soldier's overall record, a characterization of service of under honorable conditions may be furnished.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s available military records for the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the United States Army Reserve.  However, on 15 February 2006,  DA, HQ, 99th Regional Readiness Command, Coraopolis, Pennsylvania, Orders 06-046-00003, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date:  14 March 2006, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  This document identifies the characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  In the absence of corroborated evidence to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The analyst noted the applicant’s issue; even though an isolated incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by an isolated incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's isolated incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brings discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  This isolated incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a 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: 28 September 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: Yes

Witnesses/Observers: Yes 

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, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, 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: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090002983
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages