Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/02/10	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: 080507
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080521   Chapter: 14-12c(2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: A Co, 615 Aviation Support BN, Ft Hood, TX 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080417, wrongfully used marijuana, a controlled substance (080218-080319), reduction to E1, forfeiture of $673 pay per month for two months, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated on or before 081014, extra duty for 30 days (FG).

061118, <illegible>… movement of A Co, 615th ASB with which you were required in the course of duty …<illegible>... in violation of Article 87, reduction to E2, forfeiture of $713 pay per month for two months, extra duty for 45 days and oral reprimand (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: 030129    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	05 Yrs, 03Mos, 23Days ?????
Total Service:  		05 Yrs, 03Mos, 23Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92F10H7/Petroleum Supply SP   GT: 116   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (061004-080104)
Decorations/Awards: AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, OSRx2

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Durham, NC
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
        The evidence of record shows that on 7 May 2008, 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 between 080218-080319 he wrongfully used marijuana a controlled substance, in which he received a Field Grade Article 15 dated 080417, he also received a Field Grade Article 15 on 061118 for one violation of Article 87 and one violation of Article 91, 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, 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 19 May 2008, 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.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issues that the offense was isolated.  However, 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 fully honorable discharge.  The analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Additionally, the applicant's issue regarding the entitlement bonus does not fall within the purview of this Board.  The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), utilizing DD Form 149 regarding this matter.  An application for that Board is enclosed.  Lastly, the issue of Texas refusing to grant unemployment benefits does not fall within the purview of this Board either.  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: 14 September 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: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090006146
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages