Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/27	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: 020404
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 020709   Chapter: 14-12c(2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: D Btry, 1-56th ADA, Fort Bliss, TX 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 020211, wrongful use of cocaine (011228-020104); reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $552 pay x 2 months, extra duty for 45 days, 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:  29
Current ENL Date: 010725    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 11Mos, 15Days ?????
Total Service:  		07 Yrs, 09Mos, 26Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USN-910905-930904/HD
                                       USNR-930905-990715/NA
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 14R10 LOS-F-H Crewmember   GT: 118   EDU: 13 Years   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM-2, SWASM-W/1 BSS (Prior Service), SSDR  (Prior Service), ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  El Paso, TX 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 3 April 2002, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense/abuse of illegal drugs for wrongful use of cocaine (011228-020104), 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, requested 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 intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

             On  6 June 2002, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights.  

             On 21 June 2002, the administrative separation board convened.  The applicant appeared with counsel.  The board recommended that the applicant be discharged with issuance of a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

             On 3 July 2002, DA, HQS, U.S. Army Air Defense and Artillery Center and Fort Bliss, Fort Bliss, TX, Orders 184-0001, discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date:  9 July 2002.
       
       The applicant's record contains a CID Report of Investigation dated 17 January 2002.

       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, 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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents that he submitted, 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 trust and confidence placed in a Soldier.  The applicant, as a Soldier, 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 diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  
       
       Furthermore, 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, brought 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.  
       
       Finally, after a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infraction of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offense.  The analyst concluded that the discrediting entry in the applicant's record was not outweighed by service of sufficient merit to warrant a change to the discharge being reviewed.  
       
       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: 16 February 2010         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 AR20090008408
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages