Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/06/07	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents (3) 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: 010713
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 010809   Chapter: 14-12c (2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: A Company, 16th Engineer Battalion, Germany, APO AE 

Time Lost: The unit commanders memorandum recommending separation of the applicant indicates he was confined for 15 days from (010531-010614) however, it appears according to the DD Form 2707 that the confinement was deferred and was not annotated on the DD Form 214, block 29, titled; "Dates of Time Lost During this Period "of enlistment. 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): The unit commanders memorandum recommending separation of the applicant indicates he received non-judicial punishment on 12 March 1998; however, the grade is unknown and the offenses are unknown.  Further, the memorandum shows that the applicant was reduced from CPL (E-4) to PFC (E-3) on 9 September 1999.

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 010531, Summary Court-Martial for wrongfully importing into the Federal Republic of Germany 4 grams of marijuana on or between 000501-000531; wrongfully possessing a pipe, drug abuse parephernalia on or between 010301-010514; on divers occasions, wrongfully used marijuana x 2, on or between 000501-000531 and on or between 010301-010514, and wrongfully possess marijuana on or about 010514. He was sentenced to be reduced to Private (E-1); forfeiture of $695.00 pay per month for one month and to be confined for 15 days. 

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  20
Current ENL Date: Reenl/971031    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 9 Mos, 8 Days ?????
Total Service:  		6 Yrs, 0 Mos, 1 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 950809-971030/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 12B1000 Combat Engineer   GT: 115   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Kosovo (000530-001210)   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, GCMDL, NDSM, NATOM, KCM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant stated in his issue that he enrolled in school in December 2008 and completed his training.


VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 13 July 2001, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense; in that he was found guilty on 31 May 2001, of violating a lawful general regulation and wrongfully using 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, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditions discharge 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.  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 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 a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.    
       
       There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses.  The analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  
       
       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. 
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue regarding his GI benefits and that he paid into the system for those benefits; however, this is not an issue or matter, which would provide the Board a basis upon which to grant relief.  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.
       
       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: 7 April 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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090010676
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages