Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/06	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "I have read the defintion of my discharge as writen in the UMCJ.  It states that a member recieveing my type of discharge, shows a "pattern" of misconduct,  of which I did not.  My service record prior to my discharge will show nothing but a soilder who meet and exceded all standards.  The only time I was ever in the wrong was for my positive drug test.  During this period of my life I had just returned home from Iraq and was going through a nasty divorce.  I admit that what I did was wrong, but it was a mistake.  I believe that due to the sevice that I provided to my country and my unit, that I should have been offered help, rather than a discharge.  If you were to to ask anyone at all from my unit the 1229th Trans. Co., about my character, I assure you would hear only about a soilder who did his job, would help anyone, and excelled in his career.  I have lost my G.I. bill and all other rights that veterans are due.  I think it is only fair that my dicharge be upgraded. At least my reentry code so that I have an oppertunity to earn back what I have lost."

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: 080131   Chapter: 8-35(i)(1)    AR: NGR 600-200
Reason: Act or Patterns of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: 1229TH Transportation Co., Baltimore, MD 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 021112    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	05 Yrs, 02Mos, 19Days ?????
Total Service:  		05 Yrs, 02Mos, 19Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	IADT 030731-040127/HD
                                       RA 050607-060902/HD
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 63W/Wheeled Vehicle Rep   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Kuwait/Iraq (050807-060806)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, AFRM w/M, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
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 18 August 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 12, paragraph 12-1d (1) (a), AR 135-178, by reason of misconduct—for abuse of illegal drugs, 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 submitted a statement in his own behalf which is not included in the record.  The evidence shows the applicant was discharge from the Army National Guard of the State of Maryland.  The record does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service).  It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-35(i)(1), NGR 600-200, by reason of act or patterns of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "4."
       

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army National Guard.  Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the Army National Guard.  Paragraph 8-35(i)(1) of that regulation provides in pertinent part that individuals can be separated for misconduct.

       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 issue and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The record contains a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), which indicates that the applicant was unavailable for signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the service and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, paragraph 8-35(i)(1), NGR 600-200, by reason of act or patterns of misconduct with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Barring 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 contentions; however, the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  An RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  Furthermore, the analyst noted that even though a single 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 a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's single 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 single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. Further, the evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.  Additionally, 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 remains 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 November 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: No

Witnesses/Observers: No 

Exhibits Submitted: No

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 2    No change 3
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 AR20090010702
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages